Nebraska: Voter ID legislation abruptly stops despite anticipation for long, heated debate | Associated Press

Efforts to require Nebraska voters to show identification at the polls came to an abrupt halt Wednesday, less than 24 hours after lawmakers began what many expected to be a long, heated debate. Lawmakers voted 25-15 to push the measure to the bottom of the 2015 agenda, meaning it has little chance of returning this year. The move came after numerous amendments were added to the bill, which has faced heavy resistance from lawmakers and civil rights activists who say it would disenfranchise poor and minority voters. Opponents also note that Nebraska has no documented cases of voter fraud. Sen. John Murante of Gretna, one of the bill’s supporters and chairman of the government committee, asked his fellow senators not to “prolong the pain” by sending it back to the committee for reconsideration. The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Tyson Larson of O’Neill, said the measure was intended to protect the state from voter fraud and included safeguards, such as offering free IDs to poor residents, to prevent disenfranchising voters. But opponents noted that ID cards were costly and didn’t fully protect against fraudulent voting.

National: New evidence shows election officials are biased against Latino voters | The Washington Post

Voter identification laws are cropping up around the country: 31 states had a voter identification requirement in the 2014 midterms, up from 14 states in 2000. These laws vary widely in the types of identification they accept, even in whether identification is required or merely requested. And many people don’t know whether they need identification to vote, or what type of identification to bring. Opponents argue that these laws disproportionately impact minority voters, who are less likely to have required identification. Our new research in this month’s American Political Science Review shows that minorities face another hurdle: bias in the bureaucracy that implements these laws. Roughly 8,000 local officials – county or municipal clerks and election boards – manage the nation’s election system. These officials train local poll workers, provide information, and interact with constituents with little immediate oversight from state officials.

Nevada: The latest battleground in voter ID wars | The Washington Post

A new Republican majority in Carson City will aim to make Nevada the latest state to require voters to show identification at the polls, opening a new front in the voting wars that have angered Democrats and minority groups. Proponents of voter identification laws say those laws help prevent fraud at the polls. The Nevada version would enforce strict requirements on what types of identification are acceptable, including only state- and federally-issued forms of identification. College identifications would not be acceptable. Voters without an accepted form of ID would be allowed to cast a provisional ballot, which would not be counted until they show proper identification at a county or city clerk’s office.

New Mexico: Legislator wants New Mexico to consider thumbprints, eye scans for voter ID | KOB

State Senate Minority Whip Bill Payne, R. Albuquerque, can envision a future where New Mexicans use their fingerprints to prove their identity in order to vote. In a Senate Memorial introduced Wednesday, Payne asks the secretary of state to study the advantages of using iris scans, thumbprints and other biometric measures to prevent potential voter fraud in state elections. “The state-of-the-art technology is here. Anyone who watches the NCIS TV drama series can tell you that modern technology is commonly used for authentication purposes,” Payne said in a statement.

Colorado: Voter ID bills struck down | The Durango Herald

Colorado lawmakers Wednesday once again took up the issue of photo identification as a requirement to vote, killing two measures that would have mandated the practice. The Republican-backed measures were killed by the Democratic-controlled House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee on party-line votes. Similar attempts in recent years at the Legislature also failed. Both bills Wednesday addressed same-day voter registration, enacted by a Democratic-backed measure in 2013 that made sweeping reforms to the state’s election laws, including allowing voters to register on Election Day. One of the bills Wednesday was sponsored by Rep. Don Coram, R-Montrose. His idea with the legislation was to send the question to Colorado voters, pointing to a Magellan Strategies poll that indicated 72 percent of voters support photo ID as a condition of same-day voter registration.

Missouri: Voter ID law gets initial House approval | Kansas City Star

Year after year, Missouri Republicans try to implement a photo ID requirement to vote. Despite overwhelming legislative majorities, they come up short every time. The GOP has watched voter ID bills vetoed by Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon, tossed out by the courts and bargained away by lawmakers in favor of other legislative priorities. The perennial push began anew this week, with the House granting initial approval to a pair of bills sponsored by Rep. Tony Dugger, a Hartville Republican. One bill would ask voters to amend the state’s constitution to allow the state to require a photo ID before casting a ballot. This is a necessary step to overcome a state Supreme Court ruling that deemed a previous voter ID law unconstitutional.

Nevada: Republicans introduce voter identification bill | Las Vegas Sun

Nevada Republicans introduced a bill on Tuesday that would require voters to show identification at the ballot box. Republican Sen. James Settelmeyer introduced SB169, which would require proof of identification in order to vote and provide for free voter identification cards. The bill lists acceptable forms of identification, including driver’s licenses and other government-issued identification cards, and requires the state Department of Motor Vehicles to provide free identification cards to voters who don’t have another way of verifying their identity. The bill would also allow voters without identification to cast a provisional ballot which would be counted after they show identification at a county or city clerk’s office.

Nebraska: Voter photo ID bill prompts filibuster | Lincoln Journal Star

The legislative proposal to require photo IDs for voters in Nebraska ran into a buzz saw of opposition Tuesday during floor debate that signaled the beginning of a filibuster that will resume Wednesday. The bill (LB111) sponsored by Sen. Tyson Larson of O’Neill would require voters to show a government-issued photo ID, but provides for acquisition of a state card at no cost for voters who may not have a photo ID. Opponents said there is no evidence of voter fraud to suggest that the new requirement is needed and that the result would be an impediment to voting that would tend to depress, if not actively suppress, voter turnout. Larson said the requirement is needed to “protect the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.”

Nevada: Voter ID bill introduced in Nevada Senate | Las Vegas Review-Journal

Voters would be required to show photo identification before casting a ballot under a bill introduced Tuesday in the Nevada Senate. Under Senate Bill 169, sponsored by Sen. James Settelmeyer, R-Minden, and eight other Republican lawmakers, proof of identity would include a document or identity card issued by the state, federal government or recognized Indian tribe that contains a “recognizable photograph.” It also would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to issue a voter identification card free of charge to anyone who lacks other proof. Settelmeyer said requiring voter ID is “something my constituencies have been clamoring about for a long time.”

Wisconsin: Will the U.S. Supreme Court Weigh in on Wisconsin’s Voter ID Law? | Shepherd Express

Voting rights advocates are hoping that the U.S. Supreme Court will take up Wisconsin’s voter ID law, one of the most stringent in the country. “There are a lot of barriers that Wisconsin’s law imposes on voters that have not been resolved,” said attorney Karyn Rotker of the ACLU of Wisconsin, which is among the groups asking the court to review the voter ID law. “We hope that the Supreme Court will make sure that voting rights are protected.” The law, passed in spring 2011 and only in effect during one low-turnout election, has had a tumultuous legal history. As it was challenged in state and federal courts, it was put on hold, then suddenly revived by a federal appeals court just before last November’s general election—and put on hold once again, this time by the U.S. Supreme Court.

National: Voting rights for minorities threatened, experts say | Gannett

Since 2010, 21 states have restricted voting rights, said Nicole Austin-Hillery, director of the Brennan Center for Justice’s Washington, D.C., office. Proponents of the new laws, which do such things as requiring government-issued photo IDs to vote, say they are designed to combat voter fraud. Opponents point out that documented cases of in-person voter fraud are all but non-existent. The real reason for the new laws, the say, is to make it harder for minorities or poor people to vote. “The move ‘Selma’ has come out, and we’re still in the fight to secure and protect voting rights,” said Judith Browne Dianis, co-director of the Advancement Project, a national civil rights organization founded in 1999. “We no longer have poll taxes. But instead, we have voter IDs. We don’t have literacy tests. But we have things like cuts to early voting and cuts to Sunday voting, all which are targeted at communities of color who have gained access to the ballot because of the Voting Rights Act. “We see more subtle attempts to make it harder to vote. It’s just a different page out of the playbook that makes it harder for African Americans to participate,” Browne Dianis said.

Indiana: Two Senate bills would affect voters | Lafayette Journal & Courier

A pair of bills working their way through the Indiana Senate could spell trouble for some voters, Tippecanoe County Clerk Christa Coffey contends. Senate Bill 535, authored by Sen. Michael Young, R-Indianapolis, and Senate Bill 466, authored by Sen. Pete Miller, R-Avon, are two of the more problematic bills at this time, Coffey said. SB 535 would require absentee voters to include their voter ID number on their ballots. Coffey testified against the bill and said no one spoke on its behalf. She said since most people do not know their voter ID number, the state would have to mail that number privately to every voter, which could cost about $3 million, she estimated. The ID numbers are not available online and were recently removed from voter registration postcards due to privacy issues. “Our biggest concern is it will discourage people from voting if that’s the only way they can cast a ballot,” she said.

Kansas: Prosecutors question Kobach claims of voter fraud in Kansas | Associated Press

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the architect behind some of the nation’s strictest voter ID requirements, is asking lawmakers to give him the power to press voter fraud charges because he says prosecutors do not pursue cases he refers. The state’s top federal prosecutor, however, says Kobach has not sent any cases his way. Some county prosecutors say cases that have been referred did not justify prosecution. The conservative Republican publicly chastised Kansas-based U.S. Attorney Barry Grissom late last year, telling Topeka television station WIBW he had referred voter fraud cases to Grissom and that Grissom didn’t “know what he’s talking about” when he said voter fraud doesn’t exist in Kansas. But in a Nov. 6 letter sent from Grissom to Kobach and obtained by The Associated Press through an open records request, the prosecutor responded that his office received no such referrals from Kobach, and chided the secretary of state for his statements. “Going forward, if your office determines there has been an act of voter fraud please forward the matter to me for investigation and prosecution,” Grissom wrote. “Until then, so we can avoid misstatements of facts for the future, for the record, we have received no voter fraud cases from your office in over four and a half years. And, I can assure you, I do know what I’m talking about.” Grissom told the AP last week that Kobach never replied to his letter.

Arkansas: Proposed constitutional amendments to require voter ID filed | Arkansas News

State legislators filed two proposed constitutional amendments Wednesday that would require voters to show photo identification at the polls. During the 2013 regular session, lawmakers approved legislation requiring photo ID at the polls and overrode a veto by then-Gov. Mike Beebe. But the law, Act 595, was struck down last year by the Arkansas Supreme Court, which said it violated the state constitution by imposing qualifications for voters that went beyond those set forth in the constitution.

Missouri: Dugger’s photo I.D. legislation debated | Webster County Citizen

Tony Dugger, R-Hartville, who represents Seymour and eastern Webster County in the Missouri House of Representatives, admits he has brought his voter I.D. bill before the legislature many times. “If you’ve been on [the Missouri House Elections] Committee in the past, you are not seeing any new information here today,” he said. “This is basically the same bill I’ve been presenting for the last several years.” Dugger, the former Wright County Clerk, presented his bill to the House Elections Committee on Tuesday, Jan. 27, and it was met with significant hostility from lawmakers, interest groups and everyday Missourians. “I’m not exactly speechless, but I am just amazed that you have the chutzpah to keep bringing this back to this committee,” said State Rep. Stacey Newman, D-St. Louis County.

Arkansas: Effort to reinstate voter ID requirement among proposed amendments filed | Associated Press

The Arkansas Constitution would be amended to require voters to show photo identification before casting a ballot under separate proposals lawmakers filed Wednesday in response to the state’s highest court striking down a 2013 voter ID law. The measures aimed at reinstating the voter ID law the state Supreme Court struck down in October were among about 40 constitutional amendments lawmakers have proposed putting on the 2016 ballot. Wednesday was the deadline to file proposed constitutional amendments. The Legislature can refer up to three amendments to voters. Arkansas’ majority-Republican Legislature approved the voter ID law two years ago, overriding a veto by then-Gov. Mike Beebe, a Democrat. Justices in October upheld a lower court ruling that determined the law unconstitutionally added a requirement for voting.

Kansas: Kobach seeking power to prosecute suspected voter fraud himself | The Wichita Eagle

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the architect behind some of the nation’s strictest voter ID requirements, is asking lawmakers to give him the power to press voter fraud charges because he says prosecutors do not pursue cases he refers. The state’s top federal prosecutor, however, says Kobach has not sent any cases his way. Some county prosecutors say cases that have been referred did not justify prosecution. Kobach publicly chastised Kansas-based U.S. Attorney Barry Grissom late last year, telling Topeka television station WIBW he had referred voter fraud cases to Grissom and that Grissom didn’t “know what he’s talking about” when he said voter fraud doesn’t exist in Kansas. But in a Nov. 6 letter sent from Grissom to Kobach and obtained by the Associated Press through an open-records request, the prosecutor responded that his office received no such referrals from Kobach and chided the secretary of state for his statements.

North Dakota: House passes voter ID bill | Grand Forks Herald

The North Dakota House voted Tuesday to allow voters to use a bill or bank statement to verify their residency at the polls. House Bill 1333, sponsored by Rep. Randy Boehning, R-Fargo, would allow those without an updated identification to use a bill, bank statement or U.S. Postal Service change of address form dated 30 days before the election to vote. The bill also does away with the student identification certificates that were used in the most recent election. The bill passed the House by a vote of 66-24.

Editorials: The Future Of Voter Suppression Is Before The Supreme Court | Ian Millhiser/ThinkProgress

A petition asking the Supreme Court to consider the fate of Wisconsin’s voter ID law begins with a powerful quote: “There is no right more basic in our democracy than the right to participate in electing our political leaders.” Yet, this quote may prove more revealing than the authors of this petition may have intended, as these words do not come from a court decision upholding the right to vote. Rather, they are the opening line of Chief Justice John Roberts’ decision in McCutcheon v. FEC, a case which made it easier for wealthy donors to influence elections. The question facing the Supreme Court in Frank v. Walker, the Wisconsin voter ID case, cuts much closer to the “right to participate in electing our political leaders” than McCutcheon did. McCutcheon struck down a $123,200 cap on donations to federal candidates and political committees — a decision that, by its very nature, only benefited the very wealthy. Frank, by contrast, will consider to what extent illusionary concerns can justify restrictions on the right to vote itself. Yet, if the Roberts Court’s past is prologue, they are unlikely to pay the same regard for the actual right to vote that they do for the right of wealthy individuals to use their fortunes to influence elections. The plaintiffs’ petition asking the Court to hear Frank was filed last month. Wisconsin’s response to that petition is due to the justices on Monday.

Indiana: Proposed voting law changes draw objections | Associated Press

Indiana lawmakers are taking up Republican-backed proposals to eliminate straight party-line voting on state ballots and require the use of voter identification numbers for mail-in absentee ballots, moves that Democrats argue will make voting more difficult and could hurt turnout. State House and Senate committees could vote this week on advancing election bills that include those topics, along with a provision that some lawmakers worry could lead to confusion over whether university students are allowed to vote in their college towns. Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma and other legislative leaders are squarely behind the proposal to no longer allow straight party-line voting with one click or mark of an election ballot. Some Republican and Democratic officials, however, are leery of the change, with concerns including longer lines at polling sites if voters need more time to complete their ballots. The proposal would allow only votes for candidates for each specific office on the ballot. They still would be identified by their party affiliations.

Wisconsin: State Department of Justice urges U.S. Supreme Court not to take up voter ID case | Wisconsin State Journal

The state Department of Justice wants the U.S. Supreme Court to stay out of Wisconsin’s controversial voter identification case. In a brief filed Friday, the DOJ argued that there is “no legitimate reason” for the nation’s highest court to revisit the validity of laws requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls. The American Civil Liberties Union and others sued in 2011 over Wisconsin’s voter ID law, which was passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Scott Walker in May of that year.

North Dakota: Lawmakers Consider Voter ID Proposal | KXNet

State lawmakers propose a new form of voter identification for college students. The bill sponsored by Senator Ray Holmberg would include student identification cards as a form of voter ID. The cards would need to include a student’s photo, date of birth and address. Currently, students can obtain a student ID certificate from their university to present at the polls as proof of residency. Holmberg says he’s proposing the measure after hearing stories of confusion among students this past election.

Voting Blogs: The Voter ID Law that No One is Talking About: Why Voting Rights Activists Should Take Notice of Tennessee | State of Elections

With the Supreme Court recently issuing a flurry of orders and stays on the implementation of certain states’ voter ID laws—allowing some to be in effect for the 2014 midterms, but blocking another—there has been no shortage of attention on voting rights developments. While states, such as Texas and North Carolina, are often criticized for having some of the strictest voter ID laws in the country, little scrutiny has been placed on another state’s voter ID requirement that is arguably just as burdensome and theoretically more primed for a constitutional challenge: Tennessee. Despite receiving scant attention from the national media, a recently released study by the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that Tennessee’s three-year old voter ID law has deterred voter turnout, notably among younger voters. According to U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), the report proves that the state’s voter ID law unfairly suppresses Tennessee residents’ voting rights.

Nigeria: Election Commission may push back deadline for voter ID handout: INEC | AFP

Nigeria’s election body said Wednesday that it may push back the deadline for distributing voter identity cards but denied media reports that the vote itself could be postponed. The spokesman for Independent National Election Commission (INEC), Kayode Idowu, told AFP that the body may allow voter ID cards to be handed out after the current February 8 deadline. However he described media reports about a possible election postponement as “completely false”.

North Carolina: Judge to take several weeks to rule on voter ID challenge | Charlotte Observer

A Wake County judge plans to take two to three weeks to decide whether a lawsuit challenging North Carolina’s voter ID law should be dismissed or proceed to trial this summer. Mike Morgan, a Wake County Superior Court judge, briefed attorneys Friday after listening to several hours of arguments for and against the dismissal request. The case is rooted in an overhaul of North Carolina election law that was adopted by the Republican-led General Assembly in 2013. Under the sweeping changes, which are also being challenged in federal court, voters going to the polls in 2016 will have to show one of seven forms of photo identification to cast a ballot. The League of Women Voters of North Carolina, the North Carolina A. Philip Randolph Institute and five female voters argue that lawmakers overstepped the bounds of the state Constitution when they added the ID requirement. Attorneys for the state lawmakers countered that registered voters without one of the seven acceptable IDs are not shut out completely from voting.

National: Lynch Pressed on Voting Laws at Confirmation Hearing | National Law Journal

During the Wednesday afternoon session of Loretta Lynch’s confirmation hearing, Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., pressed the attorney general nominee over her position on voting laws—and at one point tried to show she’d contradicted herself. Tillis, elected to the Senate in November, asked Lynch about the sweeping voting bill North Carolina’s governor signed into law in August 2013 while Tillis was speaker of the House in the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature. “It’s not something that I’m intimately familiar with,” Lynch, born in Greensboro, N.C., responded. “I look forward to learning more about it should I be confirmed, and I believe the matter will proceed to court and we will await the results there.” Tillis then focused attention to remarks Lynch delivered on a Martin Luther King Day celebration in January 2014. At the time, Lynch, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, had more pointed comments about her native state’s new voter laws. “Fifty years after the march on Washington, 50 years after the civil rights movement, we stand in this country at a time when we see people trying to take back so much of what Dr. King fought for,” Lynch said in comments available on video. “People try and take over the Statehouse and reverse the goals that have been made in voting in this country.”

North Carolina: Voter ID requirement weighed in court | Associated Press

North Carolina’s upcoming photo identification requirement to vote received a full day in court Friday but no decision from a judge on whether the mandate is lawful to begin in 2016 or unconstitutionally harms the poor or older adults who lack IDs. Superior Court Judge Michael Morgan didn’t immediately rule on motions by each side that would essentially declare a winner, and said it may take him up to three weeks to do so. A summer trial is scheduled unless Morgan strikes down the requirement as unconstitutional or rejects all the claims of those who sued. Attorneys representing state officials sat at one table in a Wake County courtroom while lawyers for some voters and two advocacy groups sat at another making oral arguments on top of written briefs already filed since the August 2013 lawsuit. The litigation is one of four complaints filed soon after Gov. Pat McCrory signed an elections overhaul law that contained several voting changes. In additional to photo ID, the law reduced the number of early-voting period days by one week, repealed same-day registration and prohibited voting outside one’s home precinct on Election Day.

National: GOP uses Loretta Lynch hearing to debate voting rights | MSNBC

Republicans used the confirmation hearings this week for Loretta Lynch, President Obama’s attorney general nominee, to stress their commitment to voting restrictions—and to try to tie Lynch’s hands on voting issues should she assume the post. One GOP senator pressed Lynch on her stance on restrictive voting laws. And Republicans asked for testimony from a witness who has led the effort to stoke fear over voter fraud, suggested her group was targeted by the Obama administration because of her group’s support for voter ID laws. Under Attorney General Eric Holder, the Justice Department has acted aggressively to protect voting rights, challenging strict GOP-backed voting laws in Texas and North Carolina. Holder also has seemed to compare these laws to past efforts to keep minorities from voting. So Republicans sought to put pressure on Lynch to take a more conciliatory approach.

Editorials: Want to Vote? Get Fingerprinted. | Bloomberg View

Fingerprints can now be used to unlock smart phones, car engines, even guns. Why not ballots, too? A New Mexico legislator has just proposed that his state’s election officials study the feasibility of a biometric voter identification system. The idea is simple enough: Rather than require voters to show a particular type of document that not everyone possesses, the law could require election officials to collect a piece of information — a finger image or an eye scan — from all voters, which would confirm their identity at the polls. The political appeal of the idea is clear: Republicans would have the ID laws they claim are needed to protect against voter fraud. And Democrats would have a system that doesn’t disproportionately hurt minorities and the poor. Both parties could declare victory in the war over voter ID and move on.

Montana: Election officials pitch online voter registration | Independent Record

State and local election officials endorsed a bill Wednesday to allow citizens to register to vote online if they have a valid Montana driver’s license or identification card. The House State Administrative heard testimony on House Bill 48, by Rep. Geraldine Custer, R-Forsyth, on behalf of Secretary of State Linda McCulloch, a Democrat. The committee didn’t take immediate action on the bill. Custer said the bill is for registering people with driver’s licenses and voter ID cards. The former longtime Rosebud County clerk and recorder said the system would be secure. McCulloch said HB48 would give people the choice of registering to vote between the current paper form or electronically. “Offering the ability to apply for voter registration online will increase transparency, accuracy and efficiency in the voter registration process,” said McCulloch, the state’s chief election official.