Over
the last
ten years, states have passed dozens
of laws requiring identification to vote. The laws
have been sold as
a solution to voter fraud, but are truly designed for the simple
purpose of
suppressing the vote of groups less likely to have, or able to obtain
the
required ID — the poor, disabled, elderly, and racial and
ethnic minorities. And they have been
designed in most instances not to apply to absentee balloting, where
the small
amount of election fraud that does occur is more likely to be
perpetrated. The starkly partisan purpose of these laws is
made clear by
the fact that they have been passed with party line votes everywhere
they have
been enacted.
The vanguard of voter identification laws are requirements to provide
proof of
citizenship in order to register to vote, and in some instances every
time you
vote. Seizing on fears of illegal immigration, conservative lawmakers
are
claiming that citizens are having their votes diluted by non-citizens.
As with
other voter ID requirements, the burdens of these laws are real and
fall
disproportionately on poor, disabled, elderly, and minority voters.
Providing
proof of citizenship is more onerous than even obtaining a photo ID.
And as
with fears of voter fraud generally, there is no evidence that
non-citizens
vote in significant numbers.
Now that the Supreme Court has countenanced
voter ID laws, we are seeing a big surge in
attempts to implement
disenfranchising election rules. Progressive lawmakers can
respond to
these renewed efforts by educating their colleagues and constituents
about how
these laws are merely a ploy to keep minority,
poor,
and less—educated voters from participating in
elections, and the fact that
the crisis these bills are supposed to
solve —in-person voter fraud —
is not a problem anywhere in
the country.
More proactively, legislators and advocates can change the
nature of the
debate by simultaneously debunking the voter fraud myths used to
advance voter
ID laws, and putting forward strong measures that combat the real
threats to
our elections and voting rights — efforts to suppress the
vote such as voter
intimidation and convoluted registration requirements. When
ID laws are
proposed, voter protection and well-reasoned election
integrity amendments
should be offered as alternatives.
Election day registration (EDR) is another amendment
progressives can offer
to counter voter ID legislation.If ID
is to be required for voting, then progressives should at least try to
expand
the pool of potential voters.EDR
extends the vote to citizens who have missed the voter registration
deadline
and would otherwise be unable to cast a ballot. Unlike voter
fraud, voter
suppression activities — intimidating voters, spreading
misinformation to
prevent people from voting, and challenging the eligibility of groups
of voters
(called "voter caging") — are real
practices that
occur throughout the country. Voter ID laws
themselves open up new
doors for voter intimidation and misinformation as ill-trained poll
workers ask
for ID that isn't required and partisans lie to voters about ID
requirements in
an attempt to discourage voting.
Progressive States Network
— The
New Voter Suppression and the Progressive Response
Progressive States Network — The
Specter of Fraud Helps the Right Wing Shape the Electorate
Brennan Center for
Justice — Voter
ID
Brennan
Center for Justice — Policy
Brief on Alternatives to Voter ID
Demos — Challenges
to Fair Elections — Voter ID
NCSL — Requirements
for Voter Identification
Cal Tech/MIT Voting Technology Project — Research
Materials on Voter
Identification
National Network for State Election Reform - Voter
ID Factsheet
