By Tom Curry, msnbc.com National Affairs Writer
In
an election year dominated by battles over health care mandates, tax
rates, and rising gasoline prices, it’s the mechanics of voting – and
who’ll get to vote in November – that’s getting full-time attention from
state legislators, election lawyers, and judges.
In the latest
example, the Virginia state Senate is headed for a vote Friday on a new
voter identification requirement – one more indication that the voter ID
controversy will keep boiling in legislatures and in the courts right
up to Election Day.
These new voter ID laws are being proposed
almost exclusively by Republican legislators and governors in states
throughout the nation, spawning both litigation and angry rhetoric from
Democrats.
“All of a sudden after the 2008 election, these (voter ID laws)
miraculously appear,” said Rep. Frederica Wilson, D- Fla. at a recent
anti-voter ID event at the Capitol. “Why? Because we have a black
president in the White House and it is to stop all of the people of
color from … coming out to vote, because they (the proponents of voter
ID laws) know who they are targeting …"
Here’s the status of some recently enacted voter ID laws and states where such laws might be considered this year:
Enacted but blocked
South
Carolina: Last December, the Justice Department denied approval of the
state’s voter ID law requiring voters to present photo identification
that Gov. Nikki Haley had signed in May. Under Section 5 of the Voting
Rights Act, South Carolina is one of nine states that must seek
approval, or “pre-clearance,” from the Justice Department or a federal
court in Washington, D.C., in order to make any change in voting
procedure.
State Attorney General Alan Wilson brought suit in
federal court, arguing that the requirements “are at most a temporary
inconvenience” to some voters. The state contended that its law was
nearly identical to one enacted by Indiana and upheld by the Supreme
Court in 2008. Therefore barring South Carolina from doing what Indiana
had done would “raise serious constitutional concerns” about whether
Section 5 “violates South Carolina’s right to equal sovereignty.”
In
a separate but related case with big implications for voter ID laws,
Shelby County, Ala., is fighting in the federal appeals court in
Washington to have Section 5 of VRA struck down as unconstitutional. The
appeals court heard oral arguments on Jan. 19 and a ruling is likely in
the next several weeks. The Shelby County case will likely end up
before the Supreme Court and if the justices were to strike down Section
5, the Justice Department would no longer be able to pre-emptively
block changes in voting laws. The department would still be able to use
another Section of the VRA to challenge voting laws that have a
racially discriminatory impact.
Enacted but likely to be blocked
Texas:
State Attorney General Greg Abbott filed a suit last month in federal
court, asking that Texas be permitted this year to use the photo ID law
Gov. Rick Perry signed last spring.
Under Section 5 of the VRA,
the Justice Department is now considering Texas’s law, having asked for
additional information from the state on the race and ethnicity of Texas
voters and drivers. The department must give its response to the Texas
law by March 12.
In his filing, Abbott said Texas did not have the
racial and ethnic data the Justice Department wanted. “Indeed, the very
reason Texas refuses to maintain racial and ethnic data on its list of
registered voters is to facilitate a colorblind electoral process,” he
said.
Even in the unlikely event the Justice Department were to approve the
Texas law, opponents of the law contend that there would be problems
implementing it.
“The state is not ready to allow citizens the
ability to obtain this kind of voter ID,” said Rep. Charlie Gonzales, D-
Texas. “It goes way beyond just going to the Department of Public
Safety and standing in line. You still have to have your birth
certificate; if you’re divorced and your name is different you have to
get a certified copy of your divorce decree. There are so many hoops to
jump through.”
Enacted but may be blockedLaws
similar to those in South Carolina and Texas have passed in several
states and are likely to be opposed by the Justice Department over the
same concerns.
Alabama: Another Section 5 state, Alabama passed a voter ID law which doesn’t take effect until 2014.
Mississippi:
Voters last November approved a ballot initiative to create a photo ID
requirement. But the legislature must provide funding to implement the
law and the state must receive Justice Department approval since
Mississippi is a Section 5 state.
Wisconsin: On Tuesday Wisconsin
conducted its first elections under the voter ID law that Republican
Gov. Scott Walker signed last year. Wisconsin is not covered by Section
5 of the VRA but challenges have already been launched. On Thursday
civil rights groups and a labor union coalition filed a suit against the
law arguing that it discriminates against black and Latino voters. The
American Civil Liberties Union has also filed a suit seeking to block
enforcement of the law. One argument ACLU makes is that the cost of
obtaining a copy of a birth certificate ($20 in Wisconsin, more in other
states) in order to get a state ID card would be “a severe financial
burden” for some people, a burden that violates the Equal Protection
Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The voting in municipal and
county primary elections in Wisconsin went smoothly, according to the
Associated Press. Walker commented on his Twitter account: “1st election
w/photo ID required & it seems to have run well. Proof that common
sense still works.”
But Rep. Gwen Moore, D- Wisc., a longtime
political foe of Walker, alleges the governor "clearly has had a
goal for many, many years to disenfranchise people of color."
She
also contended that the law would hurt President Barack Obama’s chances
to win the state in November, adding, “This is strictly designed to
disenfranchise people who would otherwise vote for Democrats."
Asked
to comment on Moore’s remarks, Walker’s spokesman Cullen Werwie said,
“Requiring photo identification to vote is common sense – we require it
to get a library card, cold medicine, and public assistance. Gov.
Walker will continue to implement common sense reforms that protect the
electoral process and increases citizens’ confidence in the results of
our elections.”
May be enacted this yearVirginia: The state
Senate is likely to vote Friday on a bill that would require a voter to
present some form of identification but would allow him or her to use an
employee identification card containing a photograph of the voter, or a
copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, or paycheck that shows
the name and address of the voter. As a VRA Section 5-covered state,
Virginia would need to gets its law cleared by the Justice Department.
Pennsylvania:
The Pennsylvania House passed a voter ID bill last year. Both
Republican and Democratic sources say that there will be a renewed push
for voter ID to pass in the state Senate, where the GOP has a 30 to 20
majority, and to be sent on to Republican Gov. Tom Corbett for his
signature in the next couple of months. Corbett has said he supports a
voter ID law.
Minnesota: A Minnesota state senate committee has
approved a proposed amendment to the state constitution to require photo
ID for voting, but it has yet to be approved by the full state senate
and the state House. Last year, Gov. Mark Dayton, a Democrat, vetoed a
voter ID bill which had been passed by the Republican-majority state
legislature.
Missouri: On the November ballot is a proposed
amendment to the state constitution which would allow for the
legislature to impose a photo ID requirement. Republican state Sen. Bill
Stouffer, the sponsor of that measure, predicts it will pass with 75
percent or more of the vote. The legislature last year passed a photo ID
bill which Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed.
Recently enactedRhode
Island, Tennessee, and Kansas all enacted photo ID laws last year. None
has yet been enjoined or struck down. None of those states are covered
by Section 5 of the VRA.
Not likely to be enacted this yearIowa:
The state’s Republican Secretary of State Matt Schultz has proposed a
photo identification law but state Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal
opposes the idea.
Ohio: The Ohio House passed a photo ID bill last
year but the Senate didn’t act on it. The prospects do not look good
for passing a bill this year, said Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted, a
Republican.
He said the photo ID bill last year “polarized people
over the whole concept of election reform and modernization. The photo
ID bill was much more ‘nuclear,’” he said, than another bill, which he
supported, to shorten and standardize the early voting period in every
country in the state. “Once it (the photo ID bill) came on the scene,
the common-sense conversations stopped and … it was really hard to build
consensus around thoughtful reforms,” Husted said.
Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3 ...
39
Rich 711
Comment collapsed by the community
bobbski Comment collapsed by the community
bobbski Comment collapsed by the community
bobbski Comment collapsed by the community
sfcret Comment collapsed by the community
bobbski Comment collapsed by the community
