Tag Archives: voter id

Democracy. That buzzword we hear over and over again coming from powerful quarters in the US to help explain interventions across the globe, from Iraq to Central America. But while many in the world are familiar with the buzzword, few may realise that a fight over democracy is being waged on American soil as we speak, and it comes in the form of challenging brand new voting laws. Here’s a little background: In 2010 the Republican Party swept to power at the state level across the US. Today they control the senate and the House of Representatives in 25 states, and have a significant presence in a number of other state level legislatures. They’ve been using that newly acquired power to pass laws that clamp down on what they say is rampant voter fraud. To date, at least 30 new laws and bills have been introduced to change the rules of the voting game, like for example requiring voters to have a government-issued photo ID to cast their ballot. Since embarking on this story, I have had a number of people ask me “what’s the big deal with wanting people to present a photo ID when they vote?” On the surface, nothing.

Voting Blogs: State Constitutions: A New Battleground in Voting Rights | JURIST

An emerging storyline in this year’s election season is the increased implementation of voter ID laws around the country. From Wisconsin to Texas to Virginia, state legislatures are enacting new laws requiring voters to show some form of photo identification at the polls. Just as quickly, opponents are filing suit in both state and federal courts to challenge the laws on various grounds. While none of this is particularly novel, the added twist is the prominence of state constitutions in these disputes. In fact, given the current US Supreme Court’s narrow interpretation of voting protections, state constitutional recognition of the right to vote may have a tremendous impact in limiting some states from requiring voters to show identification this Election Day. Proponents of voter ID laws posit that they are necessary to protect the integrity of the election process. Those who oppose the laws, by contrast, explain that they do not root out any documented fraud and that they actually disenfranchise certain groups of voters, particularly minorities, the indigent and students. There is also a partisan bent to the disputes: Republicans tend to favor voter ID laws and Democrats oppose them because groups that more often vote Democratic are, as a general matter, less likely to possess the required form of identification and therefore will be unable to vote.

Missouri: House panel backs do-over attempt on voter ID | necn.com

Dealt a setback in court, a Missouri House committee acted quickly Tuesday to embrace new wording for a 2012 ballot measure that would allow a photo identification mandate to be imposed upon voters in future elections. The measure approved by the House Elections Committee seeks to rewrite the ballot summary voters would see when deciding later this year whether to amend the Missouri Constitution to allow a state law requiring voters to show government-issued photo identification at the polls. As originally passed by lawmakers last year, the ballot summary referred to the measure as the “Voter Protection Act.”

Texas: Justice Department says Texas legislators should be forced to testify about Voter ID law | Chron.com

U.S. Justice Department lawyers told a federal three-judge panel today that Texas state legislators should not be shielded from testifying in a case centering on the legality of the state’s new Voter ID law. But lawyers for Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said deposing statehouse Republicans to determine legislative intent of the new photo ID law amounted to a “fishing expedition” by Justice Department attorneys. The judges, Circuit Judge David Tatel, District Judge Robert Wilkins and District Judge Rosemary Collyer, are expected to rule soon on motions to expedite proceedings.

Texas: Filing Targets Texas Lawmakers’ Voter ID Communications | The Texas Tribune

In the latest development in Texas’ battle with the Obama administration over the state’s voter ID law, the U.S. Department of Justice is urging a federal court to deny the state’s request to keep certain communications between lawmakers, staff and constituents out of upcoming court proceedings. In a court filing dated Thursday, the department argued that it should be allowed to “depose those legislators believed to have had the most active role in drafting, introducing, and advocating for SB 14.” The law requires that voters furnish photo identification before casting a ballot. The filing was in response to the state’s request for a protective order, in which it argues that the communications in question should be excluded based on state privilege.

Minnesota: Voter ID deal clears the way to fall ballot | StarTribune.com

A controversial constitutional amendment that would require voters to show a photo identification at the polls has cleared one of the last hurdles on the way to the fall ballot. An all-Republican conference committee hammered out a compromise version of the House and Senate voter identification proposals and passed it unanimously Monday night, over the vocal protests of the Minnesota Secretary of State’s office, which described the compromise as “worse” than either of the original plans. Proponents were more pleased with the committee’s work. … The compromise plan now returns to the House and Senate for a final vote. Both chambers had earlier approved slightly different versions of the amendment on straight party-line votes. Gov. Mark Dayton can’t veto a proposed amendment, as he did with a photo identification law passed by legislators last year.

Pennsylvania: Most college ID cards of no use as Pennsylvania voter ID | PoconoRecord.com

When Gov. Tom Corbett signed a law this month requiring voters to present photo identification at the polls in order to cast their ballots, it looked like college students got a break. The voter ID law included student identification cards issued by Pennsylvania colleges on a short list of acceptable forms of identification — as long as those IDs have expiration dates. The problem is, most college IDs don’t. For Muhlenberg College student Erin Wexler, 20, that could be a problem. A sophomore, Wexler did not know about the new law, and her New Jersey driver’s license won’t cut it. Only Pennsylvania driver’s licenses qualify. “Two of my best friends are from Brooklyn,” she said. “They don’t have driver’s licenses because they don’t need them.” Voting rights advocates worry that students like Wexler and her New York friends won’t learn they can’t vote for the next president until they show up Nov. 6, because their college IDs and out-of-state driver’s licenses won’t grant them access.

Texas: State Tries To Keep Voter ID Debate Secret | TPM

The state of Texas wants the discussions their Republican legislators had about passing a voter ID law to stay secret. Texas, which sued the federal government in an attempt to have their voter ID law approved, said in a court filing last month that “communications between members of the state legislature, communications between state legislators and their staff, and communications between state legislators and their constituents” should be protected by legislative privilege. The state also tried to prevent officials with the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division from deposing legislators who supported the voter ID legislation known as SB 14.

West Virginia: Voter identification subject of debate among West Virginia politicians | WOWK13

We’re in the middle of another contentious primary election season and a debate has emerged about whether voters should be required to provide state-issued identification at polling precincts. Currently West Virginia election law follows the Help America Vote Act, federal regulations which outline voting practices and standards. Secretary of State Natalie Tennant said during an interview with The State Journal’s Decision Makers that a process is in place now that provides checks to the identification and registration process. ” … While Tennant agrees with making more elections more secure, she said she has concerns over whether this type of requirement would discourage or intimidate some potential voters from participating in the election process. “It is a right and not a privilege to vote,” said Tennant. “Someone who doesn’t drive, can’t get there to get a card, or can’t afford a state issued ID card.”

National: Voter ID Laws Study: Voter Fraud Even Rarer Than Winning Mega Millions | @PolicyMic

April 2, 2012

You are more likely to win Mega Millions that commit voter fraud in the US according to this study. The Justice Department recently blocked a Texas law requiring voters to show government-issued photo identification at polls on the grounds that it disproportionately disenfranchised Hispanics. The state sued the government in response, and the law is scheduled to be disputed in a federal trial in July. Although voter fraud is a problem that should not be overlooked, I side with the Justice Department, as this law would negatively impact more people than the number of cases of voter fraud. There is much ambiguity surrounding the issue of voter fraud. Only a few studies have measured the prevalence of fraud, such as this study conducted by the Brennan Center for Justice which showed that voter fraud is even rarer than being struck by lightning or winning the Mega Millions. But disenfranchisement of minority groups is very real. By disregarding an important component of the state’s population, Texas’ law creates a predetermined electoral outcome, prohibits an entire demographic from voicing their own opinions, and obstructs a key cornerstone of democracy in order to produce desired results.

Pennsylvania: Legal experts debate impact of new voter ID law | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

April 2, 2012

Six months before Pennsylvania’s new voter identification bill became law, Denise Lieberman helped file an open records request with the state asking for a list of Pennsylvanians who already have the proper identification card. The law — signed in March by Republican Gov. Tom Corbett — requires voters to present government-issued photo identification before being allowed to vote in elections. A civil rights lawyer with the advocacy group Advancement Project, Ms. Lieberman planned to compare a list of Pennsylvania voters with the state’s record of those with proper identification. The comparison would show exactly how many voters wouldn’t be allowed to vote under the new law. The request was denied. The state doesn’t have to provide the record, the denial letter says, because the record doesn’t exist. “How can a legislator have any idea what they’re voting on if they have no idea how many people are being affected?” Ms. Lieberman said. “If we’re talking about imposing rigorous restrictions on voting, then there’s legitimate value in having a sense of who stands to be affected and how.”

Mexico: Mexican-American vote in Mexico election hampered by apathy, hurdles | San Jose Mercury News

April 2, 2012

Juan Castro is voting for two presidents this year: one for the United States and another for Mexico. “I’m not sure who I’m going to vote for,” said the San Jose resident. “To tell you the truth, the three main candidates who are running are worthless, more of the same.” He’s talking about the Mexican election. The three-month campaign for Mexico’s July 1 presidential and congressional election officially began Friday. “They’re all career politicians. As far as parties, they’re all the same.” Still, four decades after he moved to the United States, the municipal accountant at Sunnyvale City Hall is one of more than 12,000 Mexican-Americans in California who have registered to vote in the election, a fraction of the nearly 4 million eligible.

Minnesota: Photo ID battle turns into a war over the wording | StarTribune.com

March 31, 2012

Minnesota’s intense struggle over voting rights and election security is moving into close quarters. The battleground has shifted to the precise wording of a proposed photo ID constitutional amendment to be written by a legislative committee. The two sides read the same language in different ways but agree that the stakes are high for this final revision. What words are chosen, and how they are interpreted, could change the way Minnesotans vote. DFL Secretary of State Mark Ritchie reads the language and sees a bombshell for Minnesota’s elections — an end to the popular system of same-day registration and creation of a parallel bureaucracy of provisional ballots that could delay reporting of election results. Photo ID sponsor Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer, R-Big Lake, sees the text of the Republican-backed bills as flexible enough to allow Minnesota’s current voting system to continue but with improved security.

Voting Blogs: Stuck in the Middle: Wisconsin ID Fight Making Life Difficult for Election Officials, Voters | Election Academy

March 31, 2012

This week’s issue of electionlineWeekly features another terrific story by my colleague Mindy Moretti, who writes about the impact of Wisconsin’s ongoing voter ID fight on next Tuesday’s April 3 primary. The new law has currently been halted by two separate trial courts, and the appeals courts have certified both cases to the state Supreme Court who could, in theory, rule on the challenge before polls open on Tuesday. I’ve already written before (“Deltaphobia“) about the effect of change on election administration, and this current situation puts those concerns front and center. Specifically, notwithstanding the efforts of the state Government Accountability Board to keep clerks apprised of the latest developments in the ID fight, the uncertainty (which Moretti calls the “on-again, off again voter ID law”) is creating problems for election officials and voters:

Wisconsin: Voter ID filed with Wisconsin Supreme Court | The Badger Herald

March 31, 2012

Two Wisconsin Courts of Appeals asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court Wednesday to take up two separate lawsuits against the voter ID law approved last year for a final ruling on whether the law should be enforced. One of the lawsuits was filed jointly by immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, while the other lawsuit was filed by the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin. Although recent injunctions in Circuit Courts have halted enforcement of the photo ID requirement in the April 3 elections, the groups still claim the law disenfranchises voters in the state. The decision to ask the Supreme Court to take up the cases falls less than a week before the April 3 elections, which include the Republican presidential primary along with a number of local elections.

National: Santorum: ‘The Only Reason You Don’t Have A Voter ID Is You Want To Continue To Perpetrate Fraud’ | ThinkProgress

To Rick Santorum, the more than 23 million American voters who don’t have a government-issued photo ID aren’t potential victims of disenfranchisement. The presidential hopeful uses a different name: perpetrators of fraud. ThinkProgress spoke with the Republican presidential hopeful about voter ID laws — which require that citizens present a certain form of photo identification or they are barred from voting — during a campaign stop in Milwaukee last weekend. Santorum said that he supports such laws because, as he states it, “the only reason you don’t have a voter ID is you want to continue to perpetrate fraud.” He went on to dismiss the notion that anyone might not have access to a voter ID, saying that “it’s not a problem.” Santorum’s claim falls somewhere in the murky world between audacity and lunacy. More than one in ten Americans lack a government-issued photo ID. These people are not committing voter fraud — indeed, voter fraud is rarer than getting struck by lightning — they are potentially having their right to vote stripped away. Santorum appears to have confused the disenfranchisees with the disenfranchisers.

Missouri: Court strikes down proposed voter ID amendment | KansasCity.com

A Cole County judge on Thursday struck down a proposed amendment to the Missouri Constitution that would have required voters to show photo identification at the polls. Cole County Circuit Judge Pat Joyce ruled that the summary that would have appeared on the ballot was “insufficient and unfair” and pointed to two reasons for her ruling. First, the ballot summary includes the phrase “Voter Protection Act,” even though the phrase never actually appears in the constitutional amendment. Second, the summary stated that the amendment would allow the General Assembly to establish an early voting period, when in fact the amendment would “restrict the time period during which advance voting may occur,” Joyce said. “Because significant changes are required here and policy choices need to be made as to how to reallocate the words in a revised summary statement, the court chooses to vacate the summary statement and to provide the General Assembly an opportunity to revise it,” Joyce’s ruling said.

Missouri: Judge strikes down voter ID ballot summary | necn.com

A Missouri judge struck down the wording of a Republican-backed ballot measure that would clear the way for a state voter ID requirement, finding it lacking and leaving it to lawmakers to revise. Several legislators wasted no time getting started, saying Thursday they hoped to put the issue to voters this year. The Republican-led Legislature passed a proposed constitutional amendment last year that would allow separate legislation to require a photo ID and to establish an early voting period. Lawmakers wrote their own ballot summary, but Cole County Circuit Judge Pat Joyce struck the summary down earlier this week after concluding the statement was unfair and insufficient. House Speaker Pro Tem Shane Schoeller already has filed a new version and said Thursday that he expected lawmakers to move quickly on it. He said he thinks a photo ID requirement would be popular with voters.

Nebraska: Voter ID bill filibustered to death | McCook Daily Gazette

State senators have filibustered to death a bill that would have required voters to show government-issued photographic ID at their polling places.
State senators debated the bill, LB239, on March 27 and March 28. A motion for cloture, or ending debate, Wednesday failed by three votes on a vote of 30-16. LB239 was introduced by Sen. Charlie Janssen of Fremont and prioritized by Sen. Ken Schilz of Ogallala. The bill, which was first debated Feb. 27, would require voters to present a driver’s license or state-issued identification card. With an amendment introduced by the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, voters who lacked the needed ID would be mailed an acknowledgement of registration card to use as identification when voting.

Wisconsin: Voter ID challenges may be headed to Supreme Court | JSOnline

Two legal challenges to Wisconsin photo identification requirement for voters seem to be headed for the state’s highest court. On Wednesday, two separate appeals courts sent challenges to the law on to the state Supreme Court, which is expected to take up the issue. To do that, a majority of the seven-member court must decide to take up the cases as requested by the appeals court. Earlier this month, two Dane County judges in different cases separately ruled to block the law, which requires citizens to show a government-issued photo ID in order to vote. The Supreme Court will have little time to decide whether to bring back the law before Tuesday’s spring elections. Elections over whether to recall Gov. Scott Walker and four Republican senators could also be ordered as soon as May 8 and June 5. The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin brought one of the two lawsuits, saying that the state went too far in requiring photo ID to vote. “The League of Women Voters is confident that we have a strong case built on clear language in the Wisconsin state constitution.

Missouri: Trial judge strikes down ballot summary for proposed Missouri voter ID constitutional amendment | The Republic

A trial judge has struck down the ballot summary for a proposed amendment to the Missouri Constitution that would have cleared the way for requiring voters to show photo identification. Missouri lawmakers developed the summary when they approved the measure. But Cole County Circuit Judge Pat Joyce struck down the ballot summary and concluded that it is insufficient and unfair. In a ruling signed earlier this week, Joyce left it to the Legislature to revise.

Minnesota: Conference committee will take up Voter ID differences | MinnPost

The state House Monday rejected the Senate’s version of a measure that would require voters to show a photo ID at the polls, ensuring the two bodies will hash out their differences in conference committee. A provision introduced by GOP Sen. John Howe on Friday – when the Senate passed the Voter ID constitutional amendment along near party lines – is likely at the heart of the disagreement between the two bodies. Both passed the measure last week. Howe’s provision broadened the amendment’s language to include “equivalent” verification measures to ensure that future technologies wouldn’t be locked out of the state Constitution. It passed the Senate with wide support (63- 3), including backing from Sen. Scott Newman, the bill’s chief sponsor there, who said he “philosophically” agrees with it.

Nebraska: Filibuster kills voter ID measure | Fremont Tribune

A bill that would have required Nebraska voters to show government identification at the polls was squashed Wednesday by a legislative filibuster, but the senator who introduced the measure said he’ll likely introduce it again next year. Lawmakers who backed the bill fell three votes short of the support they needed to stop debate on the measure. As a result, the matter is essentially dead for this legislative session. The vote to end the eight-hour debate was 30-16. Bill supporters needed 33 votes. The divide in the officially nonpartisan Legislature fell mostly along party lines. “That was unfortunate,” said the measure’s sponsor, Fremont Sen. Charlie Janssen, who wants to bring the bill back next year. “It wasn’t put forward as a partisan issue. It was never intended to be a partisan issue, but in the end I think that’s what happened. I think people closed their ears and didn’t want to compromise, which was evident when we were trying to reach out to them.”

Pennsylvania: Still paying a fee for free voter IDs | Philly.com