Can A Photo ID Be Required To Vote?

Washington Post: Supreme Court Will Soon Weigh In On A Very Partisan Battle

(Washingtonpost.com)  This story was written by Robert Barnes.

---

The Supreme Court will open the new year with its most politically divisive case since Bush v. Gore decided the 2000 presidential election, and its decision could force a major reinterpretation of the rules of the 2008 contest.

The case presents what seems to be a straightforward and even unremarkable question: Does a state requirement that voters show a specific kind of photo identification before casting a ballot violate the Constitution?

The answer so far has depended greatly on whether you are a Democratic or Republican politician -- or even, some believe, judge.

"It is exceedingly difficult to maneuver in today's America without a photo ID (try flying, or even entering a tall building such as the courthouse in which we sit, without one)," Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner, a Ronald Reagan appointee, wrote in deciding that Indiana's strictest-in-the-nation law is not burdensome enough to violate constitutional protections.

His colleague on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, Bill Clinton appointee Terence T. Evans, was equally frank in dissent. "Let's not beat around the bush: The Indiana voter photo ID law is a not-too-thinly veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by certain folks believed to skew Democratic," Evans wrote.

For justices still hearing from the public about their role in the 2000 election -- "It's water over the deck; get over it," Justice Antonin Scalia impatiently told a questioner at a college forum this year -- the partisan implications of the issue are hard to miss.

The case has pitted Democrats against Republicans, conservative legal foundations against liberal ones, civil rights organizations against the Bush administration.

"Voter ID laws have become the most politicized" of governments' efforts to try to limit fraud and voting irregularities, said Richard L. Hasen, an election-law expert at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, who filed a brief supporting the law's challengers. "It's in the nation's best interest for the court to resolve it."

Hasen is one of those who point out that the partisan division on voter ID laws often extends to the judiciary. Not only did the 7th Circuit's 2 to 1 vote to uphold Indiana's law break down along the lines of which party nominated the judges; so, with one exception, did the full court's decision not to reconsider the ruling. Michigan's Supreme Court justices -- who are elected in partisan races -- upheld that state's voter ID law, with the five Republicans voting to support it and the two Democrats opposing it.

Hasen does not believe that the decisions reflect a desire to aid one political party over another, but rather a philosophical divide on the question of whether protecting the integrity of the voting process from fraud is of equal or greater value than making sure as many eligible voters as possible take part in the process.

"People come in with a worldview, and judges are no different," Hasen said.

The Indiana case seems to offer a perfect example. The state's Republican-led legislature passed the law in 2005 requiring voters to have ID, even though the state had never prosecuted a case of voter impersonation.

Democrats there challenged the requirement as unconstitutional, although they have not produced a person who wanted to vote but was unable to do so because of the law.

What is undisputed is that the number of states with such laws is growing. The Supreme Court made it clear in a 1992 case involving write-in candidates in Hawaii that states have leeway in regulating the voting process. Subjecting every restriction to constitutional "strict scrutiny" standards would conflict with the states' ability to run efficient elections, the court said.

And in 2006, in a relatively short and unsigned opinion issued just weeks before the election, the court agreed that a voter-approved initiative in Arizona that required voters to show proof of citizenship could go into effect.

Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita (R) said voter fraud was something he was asked about "almost daily" by constituents. "At the Kiwanis Club, the chamber of commerce groups, people would say, 'Why aren't you asking who I am when I vote?' " Rokita said.

The state law he and the legislature came up with requires voters to show a government-issued photo ID that has an expiration date, such as a driver's license or a passport. Nondrivers can receive an identification card from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.

Voters without ID may cast provisional ballots, but then must appear before their county clerk or board of elections within 10 days. There, they must show a photo ID or at least two other forms of identification, such as a certified birth certificate or naturalization papers.

Most other states that call for photo IDs are less strict, or make it easier to cast provisional ballots. Virginia, for instance, allows voters to sign sworn statements attesting to their identity. Maryland and the District of Columbia do not require voters to show a photo ID, except for first-time voters who registered by mail.

"Virtually everything you do, you have to show a photo ID," Rokita said in an interview, and the "sacred civic transaction" of voting should be no different.

The lower courts have agreed with Indiana. Posner's majority opinion said that the "benefits of voting to the individual voter are elusive" because major elections "are never decided by just one vote."

He said there is a deferential scale the court should follow in evaluating voting requirements. "The fewer people harmed by a law, the less total harm there is to balance against whatever benefits the law might confer," he wrote.

But Evans said that since the state had presented no evidence of voter fraud by impersonators, the law was not solving any problem. "Is it wise to use a sledgehammer to hit either a real or imaginary fly on a glass coffee table?" Evans wrote. "I think not."

Even Posner alluded to the partisan nature of the debate. "No doubt most people who don't have photo ID are low on the economic ladder and thus, if they do vote, are more likely to vote for Democratic than Republican candidates," he wrote.

Both sides cite studies that they believe show that the law has not resulted in lower turnouts for minorities and others or, alternately, show that minorities are most likely to be affected. There are numerous media accounts and other reports of fraudulent voting, as well as a corresponding study from the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University law school titled "The Truth About Voter Fraud," which attempts to knock down many of them.

Brennan Center Executive Director Michael Waldman, a vigorous opponent of voter ID laws, said he fears that the partisan nature of the debate obscures "the actual fact that there are millions of Americans who don't have the kind of ID" that the Indiana law requires.

"We as a country should be finding ways to make it easier for people to vote," Waldman said.

He added that voter impersonation is the least common kind of voter fraud and that Indiana's ID law does nothing to combat what has been proven to have illegally influenced an Indiana election -- absentee balloting fraud.

Rokita responded that that is not a case for inaction: "Why should we wait until we become victims of identity theft, which is what this is?"

The combined cases, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board and Indiana Democratic Party v. Rokita, will be argued Jan. 9.

[charl82]

A photo ID, plus a thumbprint & fingerprint, plus legal address, citizenship stated should be carried by everyone from driving age and up. Also, all foreign students, and people employed in the USA from other countries should all be required to carry an ID card with renewals required at regular intervals of time. Visitors would have temporary ID
cards. Citizens should also be required to renew their cards every five years. It should have been made a law years ago. We Americans always wait until something happens instead of trying the prevention method of doing things.

[hwy71so]

Yessir, I agree that Florida was a fiasco.

However, military personnel are told well in advance of their need to submit their absentee ballots. Usually, the recipients blow it off as less than important information. They drag it out till October when its too late for the ballot to be mailed. I''ll not pretend to even know what went on in Florida. I only know what the news told us. That many didn''t fully punch their cards OR they punched the "wrong" bubble. I don''t know.

I DO know that it is MY responsibility to vote. It is NOT the government''s responsibility to hold my hand to make sure I do it and do it right.

[realpatriot1]

Hwy71S,

Let''s not talk paranoia, let''s talk sworn testimony from the Bush administration and e-mails from Karl Rove.

Monica Goodling testified under oath that Tim Griffith(appointed Federal Prosecutor for Arkansas)was involved in "vote caging" during the 2004 Presidential campaign. Vote caging is a highly illegal technique for cheating people out of their right to vote.

One of the so-called "missing" Rove e-mails was mistakenly sent to an e-mail with an address similar to the RNC account. It described the vote caging operation used in Jacksonville, Florida''s minority districts during the 2004 campaign.

Registration confirmation letters were sent to(and only to) the staeside addresses of African-American service personnel deployed to Iraq & Afghanistan. These letters were marked "DO NOT FORWARD". When they came back to the board of elections the soldiers names were removed from the voting rolls. When these soldiers voted absentee thay had no way to know that their votes were not counted.

[hwy71so]

The goal was to suppress the minority vote by creating long waiting times making it impossible for many people to cast their ballots. It''''s an all too common trick. Other tricks used in 2004 were sending some people from precinct to precinct instead of telling them their correct polling place, removing voters from voting rolls as felons, even though they had no record and even sending out letters claiming the election day was actually moved to the next day or week. Fraud is just a part, though a significant one, of the republicans over all strategy for stealing close elections.

Posted by SgtRDS at 04:54 PM : Dec 26, 2007

You are one paranoid little buck private aren''t you?

Its OUR responsibility to know where and when we are suppose to vote. We have to become a functional member of our commonwealth. We can''t expect everything to be handed to us as though we are irresponsible children.

...oops, I forgot I was talking to a Democrat. Nevermind.

[jsilver2th]

This will really cut down on the Conservative Senior Citizen turn out between the nursing home people voting absentee and the waiting in lines....

120 million votes nationwide

Say it adds 5 minutes per vote- maybe more because if you think about it the ID should be copied or recorded so for election contests you can review the ID to make sure it is legit-

120,000,000 times 5 minutes: That''s about 10,000,000 hours of work- or 416,666 days or 401 years of labor-
120,000,000 copies at .05 thats $6 Million.

[jsilver2th]

As a liberal Democrat I think this is great- all of the dowagers and millionaires will have to get off their duffs and go down to a polling place and mingle with the common folk. No more absentee voting so they can take a vacation to France or get a round of golf in at the country club. HA HA

[jsilver2th]

skykk: "A picture ID would be a great way to prevent voter fraud."

Can you point to ONE example in the whole USofA in the last election where voter fraud would have been prevented by requiring photo ID?

[jsilver2th]

ideality: "Are they going to require photo-id for absentee ballots? How would that work?"

This is one I don''t think the Republicans thought through very well. It ought to be the end of absentee ballots-

[red1530]

Keithle1 in New York a least the state issues a non driver ID that could be used for this purpose.

[keithle1]

What about people who don''t drive? I guess they have to use their passport.

[libsluvsuvs]

Posted by veteran71 at 09:32 PM : Dec 26, 2007
+ report abuse


************************

you best check you really wanted "more gun laws" before you flap your gums..you are too busy gnawing on the ankle of the wrong person that the TRUE culprit got his co ck up your arse.

[bill1fj]

We need to REQUIRE valid photo id for anyone to vote.
It could help to prevent fraud.
I believe most, if not all, states have a photo id available for non drivers.
Sounds like another one of those common sense things that some members of the government has to make into something its not.
Vote the do nothing professional politicians, of both parties, out of office. Lets get some new people in at all levels of government.

[frankbowers]

There was one who spoke of the South prior to the 50. I am a white male borned in November 1937 and did not have a B/C when trying to join the Army in ''55 I was forced to get one it cost me 15.00 at the time and the funny thing about it. The principal and the school custodian of records are who signed it and they neither were there when I was born in Allen Parish and the school is in Vernon Parish. Yeah, you are right there is a lot of the folks who did not get one and I bet the Black and mexicans are very much more likely to fall in that group as I was white not poor but above middle class and I know for a fact it occured with me and my younger brother.
Frank Bowews down in Austin, TX

[frankbowers]

I say give ever living soul in America an ID Card and include the illegal aliens as well and on the ILLEGAL ALINES HAVE IT STAMPED AS "ILLEGAL ALIEN" Then when stoped by the cops the cops will not have to wonder if they are illegal or not. This should please the Republicans who hire them and the democrats who wish to hide them it will make it a lot easier. Frank Bowers down in Austin, TX

[werchange]

RON PAUL RESPECTS YOUR PRIVACY
Like Ron Paul, I believe the biggest threat to your privacy is the government. We must drastically limit the ability of government to collect and store data regarding a citizens'' personal matters. We must stop the move toward a national ID card system (e.g., The Real ID Act). Under this new Law, states are currently issuing new driver''s licenses embedded with standard identifier data (RFID chips). Although, many states are refusing to comply. A national ID with new tracking technologies means we''re heading into an Orwellian world of no privacy. Ron Paul was one of the few members of Congess who voted against the Real ID Act. Also, under current medical privacy protection rules, which Ron Paul also opposed, insurance companies and other entities have access to your personal medical information. Finally, there''s the so-called Patriot Act, which Congressman, Ron Paul also voted against. As originally proposed, it expanded the federal government''s ability to use wiretaps without judicial oversight; allowed nationwide search warrants non-specific to any given location, nor subject to any local judicial oversight; made it far easier for the government to monitor private Internet usage; authorized sneak and peek warrants enabling federal authorities to search a person''s home, office, or personal property without that person''s knowledge; and required libraries to turn over records of books read by patrons

[frankbowers]

When there is going to be a vote in mexico or south america, cuba you get the idea america sends a monitor why can''t we have monitors at the ballot boxes in the states by Chevaz or stalin or castro. Hell they are a lot more honest than the bush adm. has been at least they tell their public what they are going to do and then they get elected and do it with the publics vote of confidence.
Frank Bowers down in Austin, TX

[frankbowers]

I like J. Stalin''s quote "it is not who is voting but who is counting the vote". It reminds me of Ms. Harris of Florida and the folks in Ohio. The truth be known, gw bush, is just an ordinary thief and can not help himself but what is a shame and a sham is he is killing us to be one, not one republican can see it is the shame.
The best of good byes Frank Bowers down in Austin, TX

[uzzisanta]

You Mr. "I know who''s a citizen"''s should be worried. We''re gonna find out yer moms are yer sisters.

[uzzisanta]

The voting booth will be like a bathroom stall. Standups fer the dudes. Sit downs fer the ladies. It takes a **** sample? And verifies the user. Then speak into de john..

[uzzisanta]

I got a new idea: **** samples.