Voting Blogs: Worth the Wait: DOJ Review of South Carolina Photo ID Could Yield First Real Data to Evaluate Claims of Disenfranchisement | PEEA

Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Voting Section requested more information from the State of South Carolina regarding a new photo ID law for voters. DOJ is reviewing the new law under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires some states and jurisdictions – including SC – to submit their voting changes for approval before they can be enforced.

The request for more information – which gives the state 60 days to respond and will delay DOJ’s decision up to 60 days after the receipt of the new data – came in a letter from Section chief Chris Herren to the office of Attorney General Alan Wilson.

Voting Blogs: What More Can We Learn from South Carolina? | Election Updates

Doug Chapin’s post today on his blog digs down into the Department of Justice’s data request from South Carolina, seeking more detailed data concerning who does, and who doesn’t, have the identification required to vote in that state, as a consequence of their new voter ID law. I agree entirely with Doug’s top-line reaction — At last! Some real data.

At the same time, the request seems to miss an opportunity to find out more about whether voter identification laws will have a disenfranchising effect, and in particular, a disproportional effect on minority voters. The reason is that the disproportional effect may not be so much on whether whites and blacks have drivers licenses, but whether they have drivers licenses with the voter’s current address.

South Carolina: Department of Justice seeks info on voter ID law | The Post and Courier

Read the Department of Justice’s request for more information on SC’s Voter ID law.

South Carolina voters will have wait to find out whether the U.S. Department of Justice will authorize the state’s new voter ID law, following an announcement Monday that federal officials need more information from the state.

Chris Whitmire, spokesman for the State Election Commission, said once state officials supply the information to the Justice Department, a 60-day window will begin for the federal agency to render a decision on the law. The law could be in effect for the November elections, but that will depend on how long the state takes to respond and if the Justice Department takes two full months to decide.

South Carolina: Attorney General says State will fight if voter ID law rejected | The Times and Democrat

South Carolina is prepared to pursue litigation on several fronts “up to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary,” South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson said. Wilson was one of several elected state constitutional officers who spoke at an Orangeburg County Republican Party fundraiser Monday.

One issue involved the state voter ID law submitted to the U.S. Justice Department for review. Wilson said he has “no faith that it will do the right thing.” “I can tell you we won’t lay down on this,” he said.

The state Democratic Caucus lodged a formal objection to the law with the Justice Department last week. The law passed on the strength of the Republican majority in the General Assembly. Justice requested more information Monday before making a decision.

Wisconsin: Wisconsin Voter ID Law Faces Legal Challenge | Ashland Current

The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin Education Fund will challenge Wisconsin’s new Voter ID law based on the state constitution. As a nonpartisan organization that encourages participation in government, the league is concerned about voter disenfranchisement and as a result is is working with Attorney Lester Pines of Cullen Weston Pines & Bach to challenge the legislature’s authority to enact the law.

“The League of Women Voters has been fighting for open and fair elections ever since its founding by the suffragists who won the right to vote for women in 1920. Our Wisconsin state constitution specifically protects the right to vote and limits what the legislature can do to exclude eligible citizens,” said Melanie G. Ramey, president of the Wisconsin League of Women Voters.

Pennsylvania: Voter-ID bill awaits action | Philadelphia Inquirer

Pennsylvanians may soon find out whether voting will join buying a drink, boarding a plane, cashing a check, and purchasing a train ticket on the list of activities that require photo identification.

The state House has approved the Republican majority’s plan to require all voters to show a government-issued photo ID every time the go to the polls – a step that proponents say would prevent illegal voting. Democrats say that there is no evidence the state has a serious problem with voter fraud, and that the bill would only dissuade many voters, especially minorities and the elderly, from casting ballots.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Daryl Metcalfe (R., Butler), is pending in the Senate, which is expected to take it up sometime after senators reconvene Sept. 19. In the House, the bill spawned three days of acrimonious debate before the GOP majority used parliamentary maneuvers to shut it down and send the measure to the Senate in June. Even with lawmakers on summer recess, the proposal continues to provoke debate.

South Carolina: Department of Justice decision due for new voter photo ID law | Houston Chronicle

A decision could come as early as Monday from the U.S. Justice Department on whether voters will have to show state or federal photographic identification for the first time when they vote in South Carolina elections.

Monday marks the end of a 60 day review period for the new law, said Chris Whitmire, spokesman for the state Election Commission. “We expect to hear something by Monday,” Whitmire said. That word could mean approval, rejection or that the Justice Department has more questions and will take more time to review the law. South Carolina’s history of voting rights violations require federal oversight of election law changes, including requiring voters to show photographic identification.

South Carolina: Senate Democrats formally protest voter ID law | Houston Chronicle

South Carolina Senate Democrats said Friday they’ve asked the U.S. Justice Department to reject a new state law requiring voters to show government-issued photo identification before they vote. The protest filed by the Senate Minority Caucus comes just days before a Justice Department could release a decision on whether the agency will allow the law to go into effect.

Democrats call the new law the nation’s most restrictive and say it targets a state where blacks voted in equal percentages to whites for the first time in 2008. The new law stands to disenfranchise black and elderly voters, said State Sen. Gerald Malloy, a Hartsville Democrat. “How does our law — which would be the most restrictive in the nation — not abridge the right to vote on account of race?” Malloy said.

North Carolina: General Assembly Looks for Creative Answer for Voter ID Veto | The Lincoln Tribune

The Republican-led General Assembly fell short in its initial attempt to override Gov. Bev Perdue’s veto of a voter ID bill. But the proposal is far from dead. House Bill 351, also known as the Restore Confidence in Government Voter ID Bill, stalled after Gov. Beverly Perdue vetoed it in July.

H.B. 351 would require voters to show a valid, government-issued identity document at the polls. House Rules Committee Co-Chairman Tim Moore, R-Cleveland, a primary sponsor of H.B. 351, said Republicans hope members of the legislature will reconsider the bill in September; it was kept alive by using a procedural maneuver when the override failed.

… Leaders have another trick up their sleeves, however. They may consider introducing several local voter ID bills that would bypass Perdue’s veto power and bring it effectively into law.

Editorials: A Poll Tax by Another Name | John Lewis/NYTimes.com

AS we celebrate the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial, we reflect on the life and legacy of this great man. But recent legislation on voting reminds us that there is still work to do. Since January, a majority of state legislatures have passed or considered election-law changes that, taken together, constitute the most concerted effort to restrict the right to vote since before the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Growing up as the son of an Alabama sharecropper, I experienced Jim Crow firsthand. It was enforced by the slander of “separate but equal,” willful blindness to acts of racially motivated violence and the threat of economic retaliation. The pernicious effect of those strategies was to institutionalize second-class citizenship and restrict political participation to the majority alone.

We have come a long way since the 1960s. When the Voting Rights Act was passed, there were only 300 elected African-American officials in the United States; today there are more than 9,000, including 43 members of Congress. The 1993 National Voter Registration Act — also known as the Motor Voter Act — made it easier to register to vote, while the 2002 Help America Vote Act responded to the irregularities of the 2000 presidential race with improved election standards.

Iowa: Secretary of State advocates voter ID bill | TimesRepublican.com

“May I see your ID?” That questioned would be asked of Iowa voters if a bill sponsored by Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz becomes law. Schultz, a Republican, spoke at Cecil’s Cafe Friday afternoon to the Pachyderm Club a Republican social group and said he intends to push a bill requiring photo identification during next year’s legislative session.

… Marshall County Auditor Dawn Williams, a Republican, attended the meeting and said in her 22 years with the auditor’s office, many of which she oversaw elections, that she’s only seen one confirmed case of voter fraud.

“There are so many different checks and balances. Is it a perfect system? No. Is there widespread fraud? No, absolutely not,” Williams said. She was uncertain if she would support Schultz’ effort, saying she wanted to see the final bill before endorsing or rejecting.

Pennsylvania: Democrats, GOP clash on voter ID | The Intelligencer

When Pennsylvanians go to vote, unless it’s their first time at the polling place, all they typically need to do is tell a poll worker their name and then sign on the dotted line. They are then escorted to a machine behind a private curtain where they cast their ballot. House Republicans want the first part of that routine to change.

Rather than tell a poll worker your name, House lawmakers have passed a bill that would require voters to show a government-issued photo ID along with their name and address. The bill will be taken up as early as next month when the state senate reconvenes.

“I’m very concerned about it,” said Madeline Rawley of Doylestown, a member of the Coalition for Voting Integrity. “You’re putting up barriers that make it difficult for seniors, the disabled and young people.”

National: Republicans Make Drive to Tighten State Voting Rules Before 2012 Elections | Bloomberg

With Republicans taking control of most U.S. capitols this year and a presidential race looming, states have passed the most election-related laws since 2003 in a push to tighten voting rules. Forty-seven states have enacted 285 election-related laws this year, and 60 percent were in states with Republican governors, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Democrats are pushing back by vetoing photo- identification laws in five states and trying to repeal other voting laws in Maine and Ohio, where President Barack Obama’s campaign is promoting the effort.

It’s the “battle before the battle” as both parties fight for what they think are the most advantageous and fairest rules, said Doug Chapin, director of an elections-administration program at the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey School of Public Affairs.

“We’re at a level of activity that I don’t think I’ve ever seen,” Chapin said in a telephone interview. “You’ve got the combination of a fiercely divided nation, uncertainty about what the rules are and a belief that every single vote counts.”

Voting Blogs: Political Hurdles for League of Women Voters’ State Constitutional Challenge to Wisconsin Photo ID Law | The Brad Blog

The League of Women Voters in Wisconsin announced it will file a lawsuit in Dane County Circuit Court charging that the Badger State’s newly-enacted polling place photo ID restriction law violates the state’s Constitution. From a strictly legal perspective, the decision by the League’s attorney Lester Pines to challenge the new photo ID law pursuant to the state’s Constitution is significant.

Under Equal Protection analysis, any impartial jurist would readily understand that the statute does not meet the heightened scrutiny that accompanies the fact that, under the WI Constitution, voting is deemed a “fundamental right.”

Pennsylvania: Pushing for bill requiring voter ID – Corbett aide was out selling the GOP-backed proposal | Philadelphia Inquirer

Bartenders won’t be the only people asking for ID if the state Senate agrees to a controversial change in election law that a Corbett administration appointee stumped for Tuesday.

The state’s top election official, Commonwealth Secretary Carol Aichele, came out in support of a Republican-backed effort to require voters to show photo identification every time they cast a ballot in Pennsylvania. Aichele said the proposed ID requirement would discourage voter fraud.

“We must ensure every citizen entitled to vote can do so, but also prevent anyone not entitled to this right from diluting legal voters’ ballots by casting illegal votes,” she said Tuesday morning in Lancaster at a conference of county election officials.

Wisconsin: Constitutionality Of Voter ID Law Questioned – League Of Women Voters Plans Lawsuit | WISC Madison

The recently enacted Voter ID law is coming under fire as one group questions whether it is constitutional.

Beginning next year, voters will have to show identification before voting. But the League of Women Voters wants to put an end to the law now. The group plans to file a lawsuit questioning whether the law is legal. The group says about 30 percent of Wisconsin voters don’t have a proper ID and can’t afford to get one.

Editorials: Voter ID debate needs to go away | Greensboro News-Record

The partisan battle over a voter ID bill didn’t end when Republican legislators failed to override a veto by Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue. The bill is still alive in a House committee, thanks to a deft and perfectly legitimate parliamentary maneuver by the majority leader, Rep. Paul Stam. It can be brought up for another override attempt anytime before the 2011-12 General Assembly session adjourns next year. It could happen when legislators return to Raleigh for a few days next month.

An override requires a three-fifths vote of members present, so the time to return a measure to the floor is when several opponents are absent. Democrats should take that as a warning against letting down their guard. News & Record Raleigh reporter Mark Binker also noted rumors that Republicans might try to pass voter ID requirements through a series of local bills, each one applying to a specific jurisdiction. The governor can’t veto local bills.

Tennessee: Groups prepare for voter ID law | timesfreepress.com

Local election commissions and advocacy groups are rolling out campaigns to educate people about a new Tennessee law that requires registered voters to present photo identification at the polls. Election commissioners say they worry that people don’t know or understand the new requirements. Senior and minority groups are concerned that the law, which will go into effect Jan. 1, creates voting “hurdles” for groups less likely to have photo IDs, including seniors, minorities and young voters.

The law, which lawmakers say was passed to reduce voter fraud, provides a mechanism for free photo IDs for people who do not have them. Qualified photo IDs include Tennessee driver’s licenses, gun permits with photos, any other state-issued ID except for student IDs issued by state universities, and federal government-issued IDs such as passports and military IDs.

“People don’t realize this is a law; people are angry,” said Hamilton County Election Administrator Charlotte Mullis-Morgan. “Nobody can tell me there was voter fraud in Hamilton County.”

Texas: State Cites Controversial Bush-Era Approval Of Voter ID Law In Petition To DOJ | TPM

Texas officials are citing the Justice Department’s controversial approval of Georgia’s voter ID law during the Bush administration as a reason for the Obama administration to clear their new law.

… Secretary of State Hope Andrade wrote a letter to the chief of the Civil Rights Division’s voting section defending the measure and seeking preclearance under the Voting Rights Act. Andrade called the Texas law “remarkably similar” to Georgia’s precleared voter ID law. “In fact, DOJ precleared Georgia’s original photo-identification law even before Georgia enacted its free ID provision and its most recent extensive voter education mandate, which Georgia added in a subsequent legislative session.”

But the approval of the Georgia voter ID law was done by political officials in the Bush Justice Department over the objection of career employees in the voting section, who had recommended that the law not be approved.

Wisconsin: Photo ID law for voters to face lawsuit | JSOnline

In approving one of the strongest photo ID requirements in the country for voters, GOP lawmakers and Gov. Scott Walker violated a few little-noted paragraphs of the state constitution – so say opponents of the law who are preparing a legal challenge to it.

But Republicans dismissed that claim, saying that in writing the legislation earlier this year they took care not to violate the federal or state constitution. They said the current objections over the state’s charter show photo ID opponents are recognizing the difficulties of a federal lawsuit over the law.

A lawsuit being prepared by the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin will allege that the law violates right to vote provisions of the state constitution not present in the U.S. Constitution. The group plans to file its lawsuit in Dane County Circuit Court, its attorney Lester Pines said.

Oklahoma: Voter ID requirement will be new to most at polls Sept. 13 | Tulsa World

For most of those voting in the Sept. 13 city primary, this election will be the first requiring voters to present identification at polling places. The new law, approved in a statewide referendum last November, was actually in place for an Aug. 9 franchise vote. Only 3,410 voters turned out for that election, so the city primary will be the city’s first widespread experience with voter ID.

The law requires voters to present identification containing a name, photograph and expiration date that is after the date of the election.

Exceptions, however, are allowed for those carrying only a voter identification card, which does not have a photo, and for those older than 65 with a state identification card. Those cards do not have an expiration date.

Voting Blogs: Suddenly, the Voter ID Debate is Unpredictable | PEEA

Over the last several years, the debate about voter ID, especially requirements that voters show photo identification as a condition of casting a ballot, has become so predictable as to seem almost routine.

ID proponents – usually Republicans – argue that the spectre of voter fraud demands safeguards like ID to protect the sanctity of the ballot box, while opponents – usually Democrats – see ID requirements as barriers to the polls and thus vow to fight them in the name of combating disenfranchisement.

Indeed, in recent years the best predictor of whether voter ID would advance in a given state was whether or not Republicans held legislative majorities and the governorship. Recently, however, the headlines have brought new twists that suggest that the voter ID debate is no longer the predictable partisan storyline we have all come to know – if not love.

Wisconsin: Clearing up election confusion amid transition | Green Bay Press Gazette | greenbaypressgazette.com

Voters across the state involved with the recent recall elections experienced first-hand some of the changes to the election process that were “effective immediately” this summer pursuant to passage of the new voter photo ID bill. The special procedures of this new legislation brought about some confusion and frustration, so I’m hoping the following information will help to clear it up.

For all elections before 2012, electors who are voting must be asked to show a photo ID but are not required to provide one in order to vote before the 2012 February primary.

South Carolina: Department of Justice says South Carolina Voter ID law can’t be enforced this year | Examiner.com

A recently-passed state law requiring voters to present photo IDs could be delayed. Passed in May, the new law directly affects 178,000 registered voters in South Carolina who are without, or with expired, state-issued photo identification cards.

The problem with the new law is the length of time it could take that high number of residents to receive new IDs.  As a result, it can’t be enforced in elections this year, the U.S. Dept. of Justice said on Tuesday. Robert Cook, deputy attorney general with DOJ, declared “such short time period is beyond the voter’s control.”

South Carolina: State Attorney General says voter ID can be delayed | AP

The estimated 178,000 South Carolina voters who don’t have state-issued photo identification will be able to cast ballots in upcoming local elections despite a new ID law, according to an attorney general’s opinion released Tuesday.

Since the U.S. Justice Department has not approved the law yet, the opinion agreed with state Election Commission Executive Director Marci Andino that there isn’t enough time to educate voters about the new law before the next round of municipal elections around the state set for late August and early September.

“Such short time period is beyond the voter’s control,” deputy attorney general Robert Cook wrote in his opinion. The law, passed in May and signed by Gov. Nikki Haley, requires a driver’s license or one of several other forms of photo ID to vote.

Editorials: Two-timers in North Carolina | NewsObserver.com

The arrest warrants for nine people in Wake County charged with felonies for voting twice in the 2008 election were barely dry when the state Republican Party came to its fanciful conclusion that its stymied campaign for requiring photo identification of all voters would have thwarted these people. The problem is, it wouldn’t have.

Wake District Attorney Colon Willoughby (yes, a Democrat) says voter IDs would have made no difference in these cases. This was about people voting twice, perhaps by absentee and then at the polls. And it should be noted that nine people were charged, and that’s out of a huge 2008 turnout. There were more voter fraud cases statewide than usual in that year, more than 200, out of over 4 million votes cast.

Which is to say, nine is not many, and there probably would have been nine with or without voter ID.

Editorials: What’s the rush? One major election change is enough for Kansas counties to handle this year | LJWorld.com

If there was reason to believe that Kansas has a serious problem with noncitizens voting in its elections, it might make sense to rush into a voter registration system designed to stem such abuse.

However, because there is little evidence that such a problem exists, it only makes sense for the state to take a little time to implement the requirement that Kansas residents show proof of citizenship when they register to vote.

The county clerks who actually have to run the elections are saying they have enough changes to deal with in the coming year without adding the proof-of-citizenship requirement. Secretary of State Kris Kobach should respect their opinion.

Texas: Vet ID holders cannot vote? | San Antonio Express-News

Local Democrats are up in arms about a controversial voter ID bill that would exclude veterans’ identification cards from the short list of photo IDs required to cast a vote in Texas. Ann McGeehan, director of the Secretary of State’s elections division, said last week at a seminar in Austin that photo ID cards issued by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs are not acceptable forms of military ID to vote, according to a recording provided by the Texas Democratic Party. Jordy Keith, a spokeswoman for the secretary of state, backpedaled Friday on that determination.

“It was an informal Q&A, and (McGeehan) was answering based on what was expressly called out in Senate Bill 14,” Keith said. “Right now our office has not issued a final determination on that.”

Passed after Gov. Rick Perry declared voter ID an emergency issue in the last session, the strict bill is touted by Republicans as a way to reduce voter fraud but decried by Democrats as an effort to lower voter turnout among minorities and the elderly, disabled and poor.

Kansas: Election officials want Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach to wait on citizenship requirement | LJWorld.com

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach’s proposal to move up the date when Kansans must show proof of citizenship to register to vote is not getting good reviews from the people who run elections.

“If you rush implementation of a policy, you have a stronger chance of mistakes,” said Douglas County Clerk Jamie Shew. He said voting is a constitutional right, “so you don’t want to make a decision on the fly about who gets to participate and who doesn’t get to participate.”

Wisconsin: Recalls let clerks test new Wisconsin voting rules | Green Bay Press Gazette

Sara Peeters waited at the First United Presbyterian Church in De Pere for an hour to register and vote in Tuesday’s recall election. It didn’t deter her from casting a ballot — “I came here for a reason,” she said — but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t an inconvenience.

“It’s not an efficient system,” Peeters said. “I work in a pharmacy. No one would put up with that in a pharmacy.”

Lines at several precincts in the region topped an hour in Tuesday’s high-turnout races, a dry run for clerks and poll workers to test some of the new voting laws the Republican-led Legislature recently approved. Voters had to sign a poll book and were asked to show a form of identification, although the latter wasn’t required.