Virginia: Controversy over proposed voter ID bill | NBC12.com

Under debate right now is the issue of what type of identification you need in order to vote in Virginia. Right now, all you have to present is something that identifies you, like a bank statement, or even a utility bill. Some feel you should show more, an actual photo ID when you head to the polls. There’s less than a week left in the Virginia General Assembly and the push behind Senate Bill 1256 is creating a lot of controversy. “Virginia has an ugly history of making it harder for some communities to vote,” said Sen. Mamie Locke. If you ask the Virginia House Democratic Caucus, the long lines we saw last Election Day provided fuel for republicans to try to change who can vote. “This is going to have a very extremely negative impact on senior citizens,” Locke said.

Virginia: Democratic lawmakers attack GOP over voter ID bills | dailypress.com

Democratic lawmakers continued to bash their Republican colleagues over voting rights legislation Monday, saying the GOP has gone out of its way to kill measures to deal with long lines at the polls while pushing ahead with stricter voter identification requirements. After many Virginians waited four to five hours to vote in November, House of Delegates Democratic Caucus Chairman Mark Sickles of Fairfax said members of both parties came to Richmond in January “with an urgent mandate to make real change and improve our democracy.” Yet measures put forward by both Republicans and Democrats that would have allowed early voting, no-excuse absentee voting, absentee voting for people over the age of 65, absentee voting for people with children under the age of four, increased voting machines at polling places, and keeping polls open until 8 p.m. have all been defeated. Even legislation supported by Gov. Bob McDonnell such as the automatic restoration of voting rights for felons convicted of nonviolent offenses were killed in the House, Sickles said.

Pennsylvania: Both sides ask judge to postpone Pennsylvania voter ID law until after primary | Philadelphia Inquirer

Lawyers on all sides of Pennsylvania’s voter ID controversy want to postpone strict enforcement of the law until after the May 21 primary election, allowing time for the proposed photo-ID requirements to be considered again by the state’s appellate courts. The attorneys, representing both the Corbett administration and various civil-rights groups opposed to the law, filed a stipulation Thursday asking Commonwealth Court Judge Robert E. Simpson Jr. to extend a preliminary injunction he first issued in October. If the judge agrees, that would limit enforcement of the voter ID requirement to the same rules that prevailed in the November election: Voters will be asked to show a qualified photo ID when they show up at the polls, but will be allowed to use voting machines whether they have photo ID or not.

Virginia: Senate, House panel advance voter ID measures | dailypress.com

Voter identification restrictions edged one step closer to Gov. Bob McDonnell’s desk Friday as the Senate approved a measure that would shorten the list of voter IDs acceptable on the polls that went into effect last year. Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling broke a tie for Republicans in the evenly divided chamber on a House of Delegates measure that would take utility bills, bank statements, government issued checks or paychecks, student IDs and concealed carry permits off the list of identification voters can use to prove who they are. Like he did on the Senate version of the bill, Bolling also broke a tie in favor of Democrats on an amendment that would push back the effective date of the measure to July 1, 2014, and make enactment dependent on funding in next year’s budget plan for a voter education campaign. Because the measure was amended it must go back to the House for its approval before heading to the governor.

Arkansas: State Senate Panel Approves Voter ID Bill But Democrats Cry Suppression | Arkansas Business News | ArkansasBusiness.com

Arkansas voters would be required to show photo identification before casting a ballot under legislation advanced by a Senate panel Thursday, but Democrats question the cost of the requirement and whether it’s aimed at suppressing votes. The chamber’s State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee endorsed the voter ID bill on a voice vote, with the three Democrats on the Republican-controlled panel objecting. The Senate is expected to vote on the bill next week. Arkansas poll workers already are required to ask voters for identification, but voters can still cast a ballot if they don’t show one. Past efforts to require photo ID have failed in the Arkansas Legislature, but Republicans believe they have votes for it now that they control the House and Senate.

Missouri: House passes voter ID measures | St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Missouri’s Republican-controlled House has again approved legislation to require voters to show photo identification at the polls. The House on Thursday advanced the photo-based ID effort with its approval of companion legislation — a bill setting up the framework for voter ID and a related constitutional amendment. The amendment would have to be approved by the state Senate and by voters in the November 2014 statewide election before the stricter identification requirements would become law. “This is a pretty common-sense proposal,” said House Speaker Tim Jones, R-Eureka. “It protects the integrity of the voting process.” It remains to be seen how the effort — which has become a yearly issue in the House — will fare in the GOP-controlled Senate this year.

Pennsylvania: State Reaches Voter ID Accord With ACLU for May Election | Businessweek

Pennsylvania and the American Civil Liberties Union agreed to a compromise on voter identification for May elections before a trial still set for July on the merits of the state’s law. Voters will be able to cast ballots without photo ID in the May 21 primary and any special elections before that date under the temporary accord, the ACLU said yesterday in an e-mailed statement. The agreement extends an October ruling by Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson that barred enforcement for the presidential election.

Editorials: Shelby County v. Holder: Bad behavior by DOJ contributes to the fall of Section 5 | Christian Adams/SCOTUSblog

There are three main reasons why I think Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act – which outlines the formula that is used to determine whether a jurisdiction is “covered” by the preclearance requirement created by Section 5 – will be struck down in Shelby County v. Holder, scheduled for argument at the Court on February 27. Remember, of course, that Section 4 triggers are at issue, not the substantive provisions of Section 5. Even if Section 4 triggers survive Shelby County, two new challenges will then follow.  First, depending on how the opinion is written, the states brought into Section 4 coverage through the 1975 amendments may still have a challenge.  The statutory triggers for Alabama are not precisely the same as the triggers for Arizona or Alaska, two states which must also seek Section 5 preclearance. Even if the plaintiffs in Shelby County lose, Arizona and Alaska wait in the wings.  These states were brought into Section 4 coverage based in large part on minority language issues, and nowhere in the Fifteenth Amendment is language discussed.  Race is.  Of course, the Court may wipe out this claim depending on how the opinion is written, or, it may invite the next wave even while upholding triggers for Alabama.

Iowa: Panel hears criticism over voter ID proposal | Omaha.com

Speakers at a legislative hearing criticized a bill backed by Secretary of State Matt Schultz that would require voters to show photo identification at polling places. Schultz has filed identical bills in the House and Senate, and Tuesday’s House hearing was the first time this session lawmakers have taken testimony on the proposal. Members of the Iowa League of Women Voters told lawmakers that a photo ID requirement would disenfranchise voters who don’t have required documents. They also say the rules could slow vote-counting.

Missouri: House to Debate Voter ID Bill | KOMU.com

The Missouri House of Representatives will debate Wednesday about a bill that aims to require photo identification at all polling places in the state. 2013 is the seventh consecutive year the Missouri House has debated a voter identification bill, but Rep. Casey Guernsey (R-Bethany) said he expects the bill to pass this time. The House passed a similar bill in 2006, but the Missouri Supreme Court struck it down, calling the photo requirement “an unconstitutional infringement on the fundamental right to vote.” Guernsey said the requirement would help prevent voter fraud and increase confidence in Missouri elections.

North Carolina: Voter ID legislation could hinder Duke voters | The Chronicle

As many as 613,000 North Carolina voters may be unable to cast ballots if a voter ID law moves through the state legislature. Republican lawmakers in the North Carolina legislature are discussing changes to the state’s voting laws, namely a new requirement for voters to show valid state-issued identification at the election polls. Although no specific bill has been proposed yet, experts say that Duke students, many of whom are from out of state, may experience significant changes to their voting rights. “A photo ID requirement might not seem like that big of a deal to most of us, but the fact of the matter is that democracy and our voter rights is not about most of us, it’s about everybody,” said Bryan Warner, director of communications for the North Carolina Center for Voter Education. “We need to… ensure that we’re not disenfranchising anyone.”

North Dakota: Voter ID amendment survives debate in North Dakota House | Grand Forks Herald

Despite arguments that a significant proposed change to the North Dakota voting process was not given enough attention by a House committee, the House on Tuesday passed an amendment that would require voters to show identification before casting a ballot. The amendment would require all voters to present a valid ID before they cast their ballot during a primary or general election. The ID does not need to include a photo. The amendment’s sponsor, Rep. Randy Boehning, R-Fargo, and other lawmakers are concerned about the current system that allows a voter to cast a ballot without proof of eligibility by signing an affidavit that says they are a North Dakota resident.

Virginia: Is voter ID contingency clause in jeopardy? | HamptonRoads.com

Democrats in the Virginia Senate thought they’d won a modest victory last week when a bill to pare the list of acceptable identification voters can present at the polls was amended to delay the effect of that policy until July 2014, contingent on state funding to support it. Now, days later, some who support that amendment fear it may be in trouble. The legislation, SB 719 from Republican Sen. Dick Black of Loudoun County, is scheduled for a hearing Wednesday afternoon in a House of Delegates subcommittee whose docket also includesphoto ID legislation from Sen. Mark Obenshain, R-Harrisonburg. Like Black’s bill, the Obenshain SB 1256 wouldn’t take effect until next year, and then only if the state appropriates funds to implement its provisions.

North Dakota: Bill would require voters to show photo ID | The Jamestown Sun

North Dakota could go from taking people at their word on Election Day to requiring them to show a photo ID in order to vote, under a bill passed by a House committee Friday. The House Government and Veterans Affair Committee gave a do-pass recommendation to House Bill 1332 after the bill sponsor, Rep. Randy Boehning, R-Fargo, vice-chair of the committee, “hoghoused” his original bill, stripping it of its old language and adding new language to include the identification requirement. It also has a provision that the state would provide an ID card at no cost to an eligible voter without a driver’s license. The bill was passed out of committee with the amendment quickly, which concerned committee member Rep. Marie Strinden, D-Grand Forks. Strinden said the new language of the bill doesn’t address identification issues concerning college students, elderly or homeless individuals.

Wisconsin: Groups speak against legislation ‘rigging the vote’ | Journal Times

Flanked by supporters with signs reading, “We need more people working, not less people voting,” local and state leaders spoke Thursday against several legislative proposals that they said would “rig the vote” for future elections. With around 30 in attendance at the George Bray Neighborhood Center, 924 Center St., speakers focused on potential legislative issues including eliminating same-day voter registration, reintroducing state voter identification laws and changing how electoral votes are counted in Wisconsin. “Every citizen should have the right to vote,” said state Rep. Cory Mason, D-Racine. “It just seems like such a basic statement that I can’t believe that we’re actually going to debate about it this year” in the Legislature.

Maryland: Proposed voter ID law again draws hot debate in Annapolis | MarylandReporter.com

Republican legislators are back again, pushing controversial voter identification laws after failed attempts in prior years. Sponsored by Republican Dels. Nic Kipke, Kathy Afzali and 32 other Republicans, but no Democrats, the contentious bill sparked heated debate last week in the House Ways & Means Committee. “HB 137 is a very familiar subject to many of us in this room,” Kipke told the committee. “I think most of us have differing views, but I believe requiring proof of identity on election day is a good thing for our election integrity.” Kipke, Afzali and others supporting voter ID laws view the initiative as a solution to what they see as the widespread problem of voter fraud, which Democrats insist is rare.

Iowa: New bills in House of Representatives could affect elections | Iowa State Daily

Two Republican-sponsored bills have recently appeared in the Iowa House of Representatives. One would require voters to show a photo ID when voting. The second would eliminate the straight-party voting option from the ballot. Neither bill has made it to the Senate floor yet. “It’s something that may or may not get on the Senate floor in the first place,” said Mack Shelley, professor of political science, about the voter ID bill. The bill would require a state-issued or student ID to vote. This makes it less restrictive than other states’ voter ID laws as student IDs are usually not accepted.

Maine: Special Commission Rejects Voter ID | MPBN

A special commission studying Maine’s election system has given a firm thumbs down to the suggestion that Maine adopt voter ID.  The Commission to Study the Conduct of Elections in Maine, which was appointed last May, released its findings today.  Tom Porter has more. “This is an excellent report,” says Maine Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap.  Dunlap gives high marks to the Commission to Study the Conduct of Elections in Maine, which was appointed last May, and came to its findings after holding eight public hearings, “They worked very, very hard on it,” Dunlap says. “And it’s a reflection of some very, very honest work, based on feedback they got at their hearings.” Dunlap told members of the Legislature’s Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee that the he agreed with commission’s 4 to 1 vote to reject voter ID, a measure that would require voters to present identification before they cast a ballot.

Pennsylvania: Plaintiffs In Pennsylvania Voter ID Case Ask Judge To Extend Block On The Law | CBS Philly

The plaintiffs in the voter ID case are set to file papers today asking the Commonwealth Court to extend the block on the voter ID law. It was stopped only for the November election. “Even though there is not a big presidential election, the right to vote is important.” ACLU Legal Director, Vic Walczak says plaintiffs want to extend Judge Robert Simpson’s order halting implementation of voter ID until a final decision in the case, possibly even a decision by the state Supreme Court, is reached.

Maine: Panel rejects voter IDs, backs early voting | The Portland Press Herald | Maine Sunday Telegram

A state commission has recommended that Maine reject any effort to require voters to show identification at the polls. By a 4-1 vote, The Commission to Study the Conduct of Elections in Maine said in a report that there is “little or no history in Maine of voter impersonation or identification fraud.” It also said such a law would slow down the voting process and could work to disenfranchise elderly, poor or rural voters, many of whom don’t have IDs or may not be able to travel far to get them. The American Civil Liberties Union of Maine applauded the report, which also asks the state to establish an early voting system, in which residents would be able to cast ballots before Election Day. Early voting would require an amendment to the Maine Constitution, as is being proposed this session in a bill sponsored by state Rep. Michael Shaw, D-Standish. There is no pending legislation to require IDs.

Missouri: Missouri’s voter ID bill inspires pushback over ‘voter suppression’ | KansasCity.com

Republican lawmakers are taking another swing at insisting Missouri voters show a government-issued photo ID at the polls. And they’re meeting fierce resistance. Leaders of the Missouri Legislative Black Caucus said Tuesday the Republican push aims to “disenfranchise and suppress” certain voters — the disabled, the young and minorities. “This is nothing more than a modern-day poll tax,” said Rep. Brandon Ellington, a Kansas City Democrat, referring to the tax implemented in some states in the late 19th century to shut out black voters. “Voting is a right. It’s not a privilege. They’re trying to turn it into a privilege.” Republicans reject the accusations, instead arguing a need to combat voter fraud.

New Hampshire: Supporters, opponents voter ID repeal speak out at hearing | NEWS06

A bill to repeal the new voter photo identification law drew support Tuesday at a public hearing. Lawmakers last year approved a photo ID bill just months before the primary election that required voters to show a variety of photo IDs in order to vote in last November’s election. However, beginning in September, the list of acceptable photo IDs narrows to state or federally issued IDs. As in the past two years, supporters of the law say it is needed to guarantee the integrity of elections, while opponents of photo ID say it addresses a problem that does not exist but does disenfranchise certain groups of voters, such as the elderly, college students and the poor. The prime sponsor of House Bill 287, Rep. Timothy Horrigan, D-Durham, said under his bill voter fraud would continue to be a crime.

Maine: Voter ID Law Not Recommended By Independent Elections Panel | Huffington Post

An independent panel formed by a Republican official and charged with examining Maine’s electoral system has concluded that the state should not a implement voter ID system. “The Commission, by a 4 to 1 vote, finds that the negative aspects of a Voter ID law outweigh its potential benefits and recommends that a Voter ID system not be pursued in Maine,” read the report from the five-member panel. Former Maine Secretary of State Charlie Summers (R) — a backer of voter ID — put together the commission last year at the request of the Maine legislature’s Joint Standing Committee on Veterans and Legal Affairs. The Huffington Post received an advance copy of the report, which Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap (D) will present to the committee on Wednesday. In their report, the commissioners went through the pros and cons of implementing a voter ID law. Pros included the belief that voter ID would “provide an effective tool against voter impersonation” and the fact that such laws have already been implemented in dozens of other states. The panel ultimately concluded, however, that the potential drawbacks to Maine’s electoral system far outweighed any benefits.

New Hampshire: Advocates try to kill Voter ID bill before it’s fully implemented | NashuaTelegraph.com

Advocacy groups for voters, seniors and civil libertarians joined a legislative effort to strike down the law that starting this fall will require voters to show a state-approved, photo ID card at the polls. Joan Ashwell, with the League of Women Voters, conceded the difficulty of getting lawmakers to junk a law such as this one before it’s fully implemented. “We understand the reluctance of one Legislature to repeal a law just passed by a different Legislature,” Ashwell told the House Election Laws Committee. “In this case, we aren’t talking about a simple bill like naming a bridge or funding one amount of money in the budget or another. The voter ID threatens the most precious right of our citizens, the right to vote.”

Editorials: Extend hold on Pennsylvania voter ID | The Times-Tribune

This May’s primary election ballot likely will be somewhat confusing in most counties, due to large numbers of candidates seeking party nominations for school boards, municipal government seats, tax collector positions and judgeships. In Lackawanna County that likely will be compounded by at least one but, probably, two referendums on the structure of the county government. One, approved by the county commissioners, will ask voters if they approve consolidating the recorder of deeds, clerk of judicial records and register of wills offices into a single office, and converting the sheriff’s job from an elected to an appointed position. Since it is unknown how voters will respond, candidates will seek nominations for the deeds and wills offices and sheriff’s office, in case voters decide to retain the current system. (The clerk of courts position is not on the ballot until 2014.)

Virginia: Republican Bolling sides with Democrats on voter ID measure | The Washington Post

Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling broke with his party again Monday by supporting a Democratic effort to delay tightening voter identification rules. Bolling broke a 20-20 tie, on a preliminary vote, to amend a bill that would remove several forms of identification the state added last year to the list of IDs accepted at the polls. The measure returns to the floor Tuesday. Bolling said in an interview afterward that he does not actually oppose the substance of the measure. He said he voted for a Democratic floor amendment that delays implementation until July 2014 simply to give voters more time to adjust to changes in the rules.

Editorials: We Can’t Stop Fighting for Voting Rights | Austin-Hillery/Roll Call

We have just begun a new year, a new session of Congress and a new term for President Barack Obama. But as we look forward to 2013 and beyond, we cannot forget the lessons learned from the past few years. The 2012 election season saw an abrupt reversal of America’s long tradition of expanding voting access. Voters were alarmed by the fact that more than 41 states had introduced, and in many instances passed, legislation that would make it harder for them to vote. These changes are now well-known — voter ID restrictions, cuts in early voting hours, reduced registration opportunities and executive actions making it harder to restore voting rights. Advocates and experts sounded the alarm — in the media, the courts and elsewhere — to ensure no voter would lose their rights. The result: Far fewer voters were affected by these changes than originally predicted. The voters won. But what now that the 2012 elections are over? Does that mean that the work is done and that problems that were so feared just a few months ago are behind us? On the contrary.

Virginia: Bolling sides with Democrats to break tie on voter-ID measure | Washington Times

Senate Democrats effectively delayed a Republican voter-identification bill for another year after Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling sided with them on Monday to break a party-line 20-20 tie. In the first tie-breaking vote of the 2013 session since he withdrew his GOP gubernatorial bid last fall pledging a new independence from his party, Mr. Bolling voted for a Democratic amendment that delayed the voter-ID changes to July 2014. The bill by Sen. Richard H. Black, Loudoun Republican, would have eliminated documents such as residential utility bills, current paycheck stubs or even Social Security cards as forms of identification accepted at polling places. Those were added to a GOP law enacted last year by Republicans in the name of preventing voter fraud. Democrats likened it to Jim Crow-era laws and called it a Republican effort to suppress black, elderly and poor voters before last year’s presidential election. Those groups turned out in huge numbers.

Wyoming: Senate committee tables voter ID bill for more work | Star Tribune

Old age and associated complications such as loss of mobility will affect almost all of us. But they shouldn’t block our most basic democratic right – the right to vote — said Lindi Kirkbride of AARP Wyoming. Kirkbride is especially concerned for senior citizens, but all Wyomingites in general, if Senate File 134 become law and residents are forced to show picture identification at polling places. “The scenario is it’s a terribly nasty day,” Kirkbride said. “Someone in a walker wants to go vote. The poll checkers are there and they’re trying to determine, ‘Oh, yours is expired. You can’t vote because your license is expired, sorry.’ It’s going to cause these big lines.” The bill won’t become law this year. But next year could be different.

Canada: B.C. high court to hear voter ID laws could prevent homeless, seniors from say | Global News

The contention that federal voting laws requiring all people to present identification at the ballot box could deny society’s most vulnerable people from ticking their preferred candidate will be put to the test for a second time, Monday in British Columbia’s highest court. Two anti-poverty activists and a visually impaired woman who couldn’t find the proper ID to vote in the last federal election are appealing a B.C. Supreme Court ruling that found the current law only presents a “minor inconvenience” for most. The plaintiffs plan to argue against the 2010 judgment, which failed to agree the law is unconstitutional.