Political Hotsheet
By

Leigh Ann Caldwell /

CBS News/ June 21, 2012, 5:10 PM

Voter ID law vetoed in New Hampshire

AP Photo/Steven Senne

New Hampshire Democratic Governor John Lynch on Thursday rejected a bill requiring a driver's license to vote, saying it "would put into place a photo identification system that is far more restrictive than necessary."

The bill would have required voters to present one of a range of identifications in the coming November election. In subsequent elections, they would have had to provide a military ID, a driver's license or state-issued non-driver ID. Voters unable to comply would have had to fill out an affidavit.

"The use of this inappropriate affidavit will cause confusion, slow the voting process and may result in the inability of eligible voters to cast their vote," Lynch said.

Supporters of the bill, including New Hampshire House Speaker William O'Brien, said it would have prevented voter fraud.

"We need to protect the integrity of the ballot box and guarantee that the 'one person, one vote' principle is not diluted by dishonest votes," O'Brien said in a statement.

Lynch is the sixth Democratic governor to veto voter ID laws since 2011.

According to the National Conference of State Legislators, 16 states have passed laws requiring a photo identification at the polls. Another 16 states have passed laws requiring some form of identification. Mostly Republican state legislators have increasingly taken up voter ID laws over the past two years. Opponents say the laws are unnecessary, since there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud, and are designed to disenfranchise poor and minority voters.

© 2012 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
23 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
RCRawlings says:
by MurdochSucks June 22, 2012 12:29 PM EDT
There is no factual reason to require ID for voting, either. It's a red herring to disenfranchise Democratic voters.

-----------

To the Democrats and left disenfranchised voters are Mexican illegals, people who haven't voted in years because they are druggies and alcoholics, transients, criminals who never vote because they could care less and the dead resting in the graveyards across America.

The Democrats load up the buses with most of these types of people to vote and try and register them on election day and pay them a few bucks to vote a straight Democratic ticket.
reply
MurdochSucks replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
You cannot give a shred of evidence to support your outwardly racist claims. Try again. You are alright with disenfranchising thousands to prevent a handful of fraudulent votes. Why, because you know that will benefit your political party. It's really a dirty trick, son.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
WHAT-IS-HE-SMOKING says:
Has anyone been able to find the numbers on voter fraud? Just wondering, are we making a problem when there is not one. What is of more concern to me is the millions of people who are registered that do not vote.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
stormerF69 says:
You can not buy liquor in certain stores with out ID even if you look 100 years old, You can not open a checking account,cash a check,rent an apartment,drive a car,buy a gun,ride a plane or travel by bus,draw social security,unemploymnt,or disability,with out ID so the Koolaid stops. There is no factual reason someone who wants to vote can not produce a valid ID.
reply
MurdochSucks replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
There is no factual reason to require ID for voting, either. It's a red herring to disenfranchise Democratic voters.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
marychgo says:
Something like 115 to 125 million American citizens will be eligible to vote in 2012. ("The Google" isn't giving me a more precise range.) Even with the electoral college, it's HIGHLY UNLIKELY that 20 ineligible voters here or 50 ineligible voters there are going to put the "wrong" candidate in the White House.

"Voter registration fraud" is genuinely different from "voter fraud." A modest amoung of "voter registration fraud" exists because organizations that run voter registration drives -- from the very respected League of Women Voters to the controversial (and now defunct) ACORN -- tend to pay minimum wage and set daily quotas for their registrars. So every once in a while, registrars add Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck or auntie from three states away to the list. But it's VERY unlikely any election judge will hand a ballot to Mickey or Donald or distant auntie.

"Voter fraud" is more serious, but even IT more often occurs due to misunderstanding rather than an evil desire to compromise the votes of eligible citizens. For example, some states restore the voting rights of felons who've completed their sentences; other states don't restore those rights, or restore them only after several years. So some ex-felons vote even though they're not eligible, while others who are eligible fail to vote. In neither case is there criminal intent. Some immigrants falsely believe having a green card makes them eligible to vote; if the voter registration office fails to catch this confusion when they register, they may vote even though they're not eligible. But, again, there's no criminal intent.

During the Bush Administration, a special DOJ team under the direction of Hans von Spakovsky spent years and millions of dollars seeking voter fraud. (In the process, eight or ten U.S. Attorneys were fired because they refused to pursue voter fraud cases that didn't have enough evidence to get a conviction.) And all that time and taxpayer money produced perhaps a dozen convictions across the country.

NO ONE wants people who AREN'T eligible to vote. But I wish I were equally confident that none of my fellow citizens wants people who ARE eligible to vote to be PREVENTED from voting by the obstacles we set up to prevent "voter fraud"....
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
nearl451 says:
The basic question that merits an answer is: How many legitimate voters is it right to disenfranchise in order to ferret out a single fraudulent vote? 100 to 1? 1000 to 1?

Because that is what is occuring. For most of the purges and ID laws, Hundreds of legitimate voters are not allowed to voice their Constitutional right in order to prevent single digits of illegitimate votes.
reply
stormerF69 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
You have yet to explain how showing an ID disenfranchises anyone from voting? Or how anyone who is of the voting age does not have an ID whom is eligable to vote.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
barbaram99 says:
I have to show a photo ID to vote if I go to the poll to vote..I vote by mail..The workers at the polls ask to see the voter card and ID card..I show them..
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Ulgnud says:
Funny how the liberals want to block voter verification. Disenfranchise the poor and minorities? Get real. Those people need and have valid photo ID just to function in society. Try Again.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
sjc_1 says:
Not everyone is a rich corporate raider like Mitt, some ride the bus, cash their paychecks and can not make it to the DMV to get an ID card. Even if they did, the guy at the polling place would say the picture does not look like you, so you do not get to vote.
reply
vsmit replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Ever tried to do much of anything in our society without a photo ID, like cash a paycheck? Open a bank account? Most of us rich corporate raiders have an ID so we can function in society.
stormerF69 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
SIc,.. stop with the koolaid,there is no reason a voter does not have an ID,You can not even get into the White House with one,Or any fundraiser,or cash a check.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Lindag20 says:
The "fraudulent" voters the rightwingers keep screaming about seem to mostly be people who register to vote and aren't actually eligible voters. It is the job of the local registrar of voters to deal with that. There seems to be NO evidence that the people who actually go to the polls and vote are not eligible to vote.
reply
stormerF69 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
When there are 180,000 ineligable voters still on the rolls of Flordia because they have moved out of state or died then some still vote? Or Acorn registers Donald Duck, one would suspect there is voter fraud.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
RCRawlings says:
I didn't realize they had that many illegal alien Mexican nationals with fradulent documentation to be able to vote in New Hampshire for the Democratic Governor to reject the bill to keep illegals, Bims, criminals and other ineligible voters from voting?
The dead will also be voting for Obama along with his Zombies again as they did in 2008.
Oh well!
reply
BluePress replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
sandi you must have worked for ACORN before their voter fraud caught up to them.
I can tell by you dishonest blah blah.
Cheaters and frauds one all on the rabid left.
Shameless as well
See all 23 Comments